Download - Results from Optimized Asset Reliability
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Results from Optimized Reliability
Presented by: Ricky Smith, CMRP February 2013
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
“A Proactive Reliability Process is a supply chain. If a step in the process is skipped, or performed at a substandard level, the process creates defects known as failures. The output of a healthy reliability process is optimal asset reliability at optimal cost.”
― Ron Thomas, former Reliability Director, Dofasco Steel, Hamilton, ON
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Maintenance
• To Maintain • Preserve, and Protect from Degradation • Maintain Asset Reliability
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Reliability
Meeting the functional requirements of the end user
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Reactive Maintenance Attributes
• Ineffective or No Planning and Scheduling • PM Compliance has a wide variance • Performing PM on Equipment that continues to breakdown • Overnight deliveries sit for weeks, months • Everyone works as hard as they can with little if any
movement seen toward proactive • Storeroom is Chaos (people standing in line at 7:00am
waiting on parts) • Contractor replacing equipment with no one validating if the
defect was eliminated or work was completed accurately
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Variation is Your Enemy - Causes
• No Repeatable/Effective Procedures • Lack of Discipline in maintenance execution • The wrong maintenance approach to reliability • Production not operating the equipment to standard • PM Compliance is Too Wide • Doing Too Much PM • No standards or specifications
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Dr. Deming:
“Your system is perfectly designed to give you the results you are getting.”
7
05
101520253035404550556065707580
Hou
rs
Electric Motors – Plant Wide (Mean Time Between Failures)
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
World Class Standards – Where are you? • PM Execution – 15% • PM Results – 15% • PdM Execution – 15% • PdM Results – 35% • Total Work “Planned” – 90% • Reactive Work – Less than 2% • Stock-outs – less than 2% • Scheduled compliance by day/week – 85 to 90% • Failure Elimination is a key focus of all (FRACAS) • Work orders are closed out with ALL Codes ID
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Alcoa Mt Holly vs. World Class Standards
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Cost Comparison of Maintenance Programs
Source: EPRI Power Generation Study
Run to Failure
Preventive Predictive Precision
Main
tena
nce C
ost
($ p
er H
orse
powe
r)
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Safety and Reliability
1 5 9 13 17 21 25 28 33 37 41 45 48 53
15
35
55
75
95
115
135
Month
OEE
(% o
f Bas
e)
Inju
ry R
ate
(% o
f Bas
e)
Source: The RM Group, Knoxville, TN
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
OEE Injury Rate
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Maintenance Costs vs. Vibration Analysis
Source: John Schultz, RM Group
Source: 1997 Benchmarking Study in Chemical Processing industry, John Schultz to be featured in Ron Moore’s new book What Tool? When? Selecting the Right Manufacturing Improvement Strategies and Tools
Main
tena
nce C
osts
($) %
RAV
Vibration Analysis (%)
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Maintenance Costs vs. Equipment on PM
Source: John Schultz, RM Group
Equipment on PM (%) Source: 1997 Benchmarking Study in Chemical Processing industry, John Schultz to be featured in Ron Moore’s new book What Tool? When? Selecting the Right Manufacturing Improvement Strategies and Tools
Main
tena
nce C
osts
($) %
RAV
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Why does it all matter?
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Maintenance Cost % of RAV
Copyright 2013 GPAllied©
Questions/Comments?