© A

BB P

I UK

Oil, Gas & Petrochemicals

Cement, Minerals,Mining

Chemicals Marine &Turbocharging

Metals &Foundry

Pulp, Paper &Printing

Life Sciences

A Guide to Effective Maintenance

Strategy Implementation

Putting theory intoPractice

© A

BB P

I UKThe Maintenance Challenge

To Deliver :� Regulatory compliance� High plant availability� Reliable equipment � Cost-effective & targeted

maintenance� Statutory / HSE compliance

Delivering sustainable improvements is hard !

� Little time available� Resources reducing � Priorities changing

© A

BB P

I UKMaintenance Strategy Model

ASSET PERFORMANCEMANAGEMENT

Integrated MaintenanceStrategy

WORKMANAGEMENT

PEOPLE &ORGANISATION

Manufacturing Strategy

Business Strategy

LEGISLATIVECOMPLIANCE

ENGINEERINGRESOURCES

MANAGEMENT

FINANCIALCONTROL

ASSET PERFORMANCEMANAGEMENT

Integrated MaintenanceStrategy

WORKMANAGEMENT

PEOPLE &ORGANISATION

Manufacturing Strategy

Business Strategy

LEGISLATIVECOMPLIANCE

ENGINEERINGRESOURCES

MANAGEMENT

FINANCIALCONTROL

© A

BB P

I UKAsset Performance Management

� Critical equipment – prioritised; issues known?� Maintenance routines reviewed – cost-effective,

technically effective?� Asset condition – monitored; condition known? � Spares – critical spares identified; spares holding

& management optimised?� Asset life – known; asset replacement planned &

costed? � Effective Task Management processes in place?� Efficient data storage; handling processes and

information retrieval?

Where to start?

© A

BB P

I UKSources of Unreliability

Operations30 - 50%

Assets30 - 40%

Maintenance10 - 30%

UnreliablePlant

•Poorly defined operating procedures & training•Ineffective cross functional team-working•Lack of measures / targets•Inconsistent operation•Lack of training

•Inaccurate initial specification •Poor design for maintenance or operation•Change of use / modification•Ageing assets

•No or inadequate strategy•Inadequate monitoring / knowledge of condition•Poor / no rebuild specifications•Lack of technical skills / training

© A

BB P

I UKPerformance and Practices – the current position

0 100%

100%

PERFORMANCE

PRACTICE

WORLDCLASS

AVERAGE

ESSENTIAL TOIMPROVE

POTENTIALTO IMPROVE

NEEDTO IMPROVE

PROMISING

© A

BB P

I UKValue Gap Analysis – examining the losses

Waterfall Diagram

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total HoursAvailable

No Demand MaximumOperating

Time

Time Lost toEquipmentAvailability

AvailableHours to

Make Product

Time Lost MakingProductSlowly

Hours atMaximum

Rate

Time Lost inQuality

Problems

Hours ofGood

Product atMax Rate

© A

BB P

I UKTackling Current Problems

Typical downtime pareto – is this enough?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30C

omp

1

Com

p 2

Cen

trif

Cry

st

Agi

t 1

Agi

t 2

Drie

r

Rot

v/v

Stri

pper

Rea

ct A

Rea

ct B

Filte

r

C.T

ower

Days Lost Production by Plant Equipment Failure

© A

BB P

I UKRisk-Based Approaches

� Clear need to anticipate future problems

� Identify future risks and opportunities

Increasing number of applications� Pressure Systems � Equipment maintenance

strategies� Critical spares� Maintenance & calibration

routines� Critical trips and alarms� Validation

© A

BB P

I UK

Knowledge & Understanding

Design & ConstructionOperation : Normal / ExcursionsInspection / Maintenance HistoryFailure Mechanisms / RatesIncidentsNature / Definition DefectsCriticalityDetection techniques

Risk Based Inspection (RBI)Rigorous Approach to Managing Pressure System Risks

Probability of

Failure

Consequence of

Failure

Optimum Inspection Regime

DesignOperationsImplications

+

© A

BB P

I UKTypical Benefits from RBI

26Unforeseen Shutdown Repairs

1718Predicted Repairs

4781Shutdown Event Inspections

18880Non-invasive Inspections

232157Items Studied (RBI)

20021997YEAR

© A

BB P

I UKTypical Benefits from RBI

Study A Study B Study C Study D

Average inspection interval before & after

RBI study

31 to 44 months No data 54 to 85

months48 to 65 months

Vessels moved to non-invasive inspection 16 out of 26 76 out of 157 90 out of 179 41 out of 82

Reduction in inspection costs 58% 49% 61% 81%

© A

BB P

I UKTargeted Approach

� Select areas for improvement (unit; plant; systems) � Use techniques for Screening / Prioritisation

� To gain most benefit� To minimise cost, time and resource

� Identify the most appropriate tools for the job� Time; resources; cost

� A ‘one size fits all policy’ usually fails

Criticality Analysis /

Opportunity Assessment

Detailed Assessment

RapidAssessment

(80 / 20 Analysis)

Generic Assessment

Decision Process

TaskDefinition

Document Strategy

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

Criticality Analysis /

Opportunity Assessment

Detailed Assessment

RapidAssessment

(80 / 20 Analysis)

Generic Assessment

Decision Process

TaskDefinition

Document Strategy

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

© A

BB P

I UKTargeted Approach – Criticality Analysis

� Prioritise & identify vulnerabilities

� To pre-select items for further analysis� Quick method � Can be tailored to

suit individual requirements

� Range of uses

Overall Criticality Score Frequency

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

<50 <100 <150 <200 <250 <300 <350 >350

Overall Criticality Scores

No.

Equ

ipm

ent I

tem

s

© A

BB P

I UKTargeted Approach - Screening

0102030405060708090

100

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time %

Num

ber %

Step 1:Screening Process

Step 2:Criticality AnalysisProcess

Step 3:Selective DetailedAnalysis Processes

© A

BB P

I UKPerformance Improvement

� Increasing equipment reliability� Reducing HSE consequences of failure� Reducing Customer consequences of failure� Reducing the Production Cost of failure� Reducing Outage Time� Reducing Repair Cost

Stud

y R

efer

ence

Uni

t Ke

y: 1

=Uni

t 1,

2=U

nit 2

, U

=Util

ities

Plan

t Ite

m N

umbe

rPlant Item Description

Opp

ortu

nity

Sco

re

Improve MTBFReduce the HSE consequences of

failure

Reduce the customer

consequences of failure

Reduce the production cost

rate of failure

Reduce outage time

Reduce repair cost

46 1 P123 Transfer Pump 65 Limited benefit Limited benefit Limited benefit Consider Limited benefit Consider

47 1 D434 Rotary Drier 480 Yes Limited benefit Limited benefit Consider Consider Consider

48 1 A223 Agitator 152Limited benefit, low chance of

successConsider Limited benefit Consider Consider Consider

Identify opportunities for performance improvement

© A

BB P

I UK

Select appropriate tools� Failure Mode Analysis Tools

� FMEA / FMECA� Rapid FMEA using Generics

� Risk Based Inspection� Statistical analysis / Designed experiments � Remaining life assessment� Spares optimisation � Safety Integrity Level Determination� Reliability Analysis Tools

� Root Cause Analysis � Cause & Effect Diagrams with Additional Cards

(CEDAC) � Changeover Time Reduction (SMED)

� Reliability modelling

© A

BB P

I UKDefining Equipment StrategiesCriticality Analysis / ScreeningProcess

Failure ModeAnalysis

Processes

Rapid FMEAusing Generic

EquipmentModules

Generic Strategies

-by equipment type or activity

MaintenanceDecision Process

MaintenanceTask

Definition

Other Processes :Spares Review;Contingency

Planning

Document Equipment

MaintenanceStrategy

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

© A

BB P

I UK

Rapid FMEA using Generics

� Rapid FMEA approach using Generic modules for Medium Criticality equipment

� Rapid process by :� Using generic FMEA’s developed at a range of

levels to identify Maintenance Options� Reviewing most significant failure modes only

� Reviewed for any differences in type or duty application

� Maintenance Decision using identified Maintenance Options as a guide

� Focus and time is shifted to the decision process rather than the analysis

© A

BB P

I UKGeneric FMEA Application

Analysis Required

Asset Assembly 3

Generic Subassembly FMEA

Subassembly 2

Generic Component FMEA

Component 2

Analysis Required

Component 1Subassembly 1Asset Assembly 2

Generic Assembly FMEA

Asset Assembly 1

© A

BB P

I UK

Maintenance Strategy Decision �Planned Maintenance

� Preventive :� Scheduled or Fixed Time Maintenance (FTM)

- Time interval based� Condition Based or Predictive Maintenance

(CBM) - Equipment condition based� Routine Asset Care (RAC)

- Regular running maintenance eg servicing, adjustments, level checks

� Proactive or Design Out Maintenance (DOM)- Improvement based

� Corrective Maintenance�Unplanned Maintenance

� Corrective Maintenance or Operate to Failure (OTF) - Reactive or breakdown

© A

BB P

I UKMaintenance Decision Diagram

Would Routine Service extend life

to failure?

Is the rate of deterioration or time to failure

predictable and consistent?

Is there a reliable indication / early

warning of failure?

Is the interval between detection

and failure sufficient to

act on?

Is there a suitable condition monitoring routine that is cost

effective to implement and operate?

CONDITION BASED

MAINTENANCE

OPERATE TOFAILURE

FIXED TIMEMAINTENANCE

Is Maintenance likely to be cost

effective?

Is RoutineService

Cost effective?

ROUTINE ASSET CARE

Agree Maintenance

Policy

N

N

YY

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N Y N

© A

BB P

I UKDocument Maintenance Strategy� Requirement to document the equipment

strategies � Collect together relevant routines

� Installation; start-up & pre-shutdown routines� Running routines� Shutdown routines� Quality build issues� Critical spares

� Live & accessible electronic document

� Requires little updating

© A

BB P

I UKExample – Criticality Analysis

Problem� Study to identify potential risks of extending time

between shutdownsProcess

� Step 1 studied 1328 items � Step 2 studied 221 items (17%)� Step 3 studied 82 items (6%)� Focus on key problems using Risk Based Approach

Outcome� 6 items needed action to operate within acceptable

risk boundaries� 20 others were acceptable, but simple actions reduced

risks further� Overall project done in less time and significantly less

cost

© A

BB P

I UKExample – Reliability ‘Baseline’ Approach

Background� Pharmaceutical vial capping line� High availability / reliability required� ‘Problematic machine’ – frequent stoppages

Problem� Improve reliability until a new machine can be

purchased / installed� No planned maintenance schedules � Maintenance currently seen as reactive� Poor equipment condition � No standard set up procedure� ‘On the job’ training� Machine very clean!

© A

BB P

I UKImprovement ProcessSolution

� ‘Baseline’ study compared current to historical data� Recovery plan

� Machine refurbishment� Set and operate machine to standard procedures� Establish maintenance strategy

� Daily / weekly set up� Longer Term maintenance – monthly / 6 monthly� Annual overhaul

� Communication, training and further improvementBenefits

� Weekly downtime reduced from 8 hours to 30 minutes� Vial change time reduced from 2 days to 1.2 hours

© A

BB P

I UKContact Information

Martin BrownAsset Management ServicesABB Eutech

Tel : +44 1925 741074e-mail : martin.brown@gb.abb.com