MAINTAINING MAINTENANCE
By Doods A. Amora, PEE
By Doods A. Amora, PEE
In the past, responsibilities of engineering maintenance had to concentrate only in making machineries & equipment run in service to production or operation departments. Today, maintenance is already included in the ownership of the quality and quantity of the products produced, because after all, it is maintenance’s job to make the process capability of the plant fit to produce such products. The many new concepts in modern maintenance management will then become as the bases in establishing the yardsticks in measuring performances in maintenance.
Quality maintenance is synonymous to quality product. This means that system equipment must be in tip-top condition, efficient, reliable and above all, available to service at any time they are needed. Quality maintenance in some plants is labelled as “Zero Production Downtime”, or in more strict fashion, others named it as “Zero Breakdown”. A “Zero Breakdown” policy can only be attained through a full time, whole-hearted and effective maintenance management, to include the commitment of top management. The key word here is “effective”. How effective the maintenance efforts are, is a question that every management should answer.
There are several ways in making a maintenance program in a plant. We say that a maintenance program is unique to every plant to fit different patterns of complexities in operation and to the different attributes of top level management policy towards maintenance. Some plants used to refer it as “Preventive Maintenance”, while others call it “Reliability Centered Maintenance” or others label it as “Total Productive Maintenance”. Whatever the program is, the objective is common - that is, to bring the plant to shape.
THE MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE AUDIT
It is important to mention that most manufacturing plants in the country today do not have any visible indicators of the effectiveness of their own maintenance programs.
In many instances, maintenance crew used to content themselves in having successfully weathered major breakdowns which may have earlier required a round-the-clock work. With all the adrenaline flowing, we may call it as “Magdamag Type Maintenance”.
But there can never be quality maintenance in this case, because after the euphoria of its “heroism”, comes the tendency to relax and be complacent from the true attributes of maintenance. What happens next is what we call “Pa-Easy Easy Na Lang Maintenance” or “Waiting-for-Trouble” maintenance. In short, our maintenance attitudes seem to follow a biorhythm cycle - ‘sometimes up, sometimes down’. What if the maintenance referred to in this discussion, is that of an airliner? Something therefore has to be done by way of controlling the direction of maintenance towards consistent and sustained effectiveness. This is what this author called, “Maintaining Maintenance”. Have we ever thought of how to maintain maintenance?
Establishment of a maintenance performance standard is very much wanting if we are determined to monitor and eventually improve its performance. One way to do this is to look into the past by conducting a SYSTEM AUDIT on historical performance levels, where the objectives towards improving them are anchored.
As examples of maintenance audits, two common scenarios can be used as pilot areas, to wit:
A Utilities/Support Plant which services the requirements of the production process, (a parallel configuration plant).
A Production Plant producing the main product line, (a serial configuration plant).
THE UTILITY/SUPPORT PLANT
It is typical for support plants like steam, water treatment, refrigeration or power generating plants supplying utilities for production processes to have over its maximum duties, substantial sizes and number of reserve equipment necessary for the continuity & reliability of its operation.
Note that because of the installed spare units in a ‘support plant’, system outages leading to production downtime are always averted, as failure of one equipment could not necessarily affect the operation of a production line at the other side of the wall.
Most support plants are in parallel configuration, or in a few instances, a combination of parallel and serial set-up, while production lines are usually arranged in serial configuration. In the absence of any maintenance audit however, individual equipment maintenance status could not be made readily visible to top management and even by the maintenance group themselves, thus explains the complacency towards the ever-readiness of system machineries.
In a System Audit, the most important parameter that higher management should monitor is the “EQUIPMENT READINESS or AVAILABILITY FACTOR” or to a greater view, the “SYSTEM READINESS or SYSTEM AVAILABILITY FACTOR”. Measuring effectiveness of maintenance is to see how consistently ready the system equipment are, or how capable the support systems are in meeting the variable demands of operation or production. In other words, given a system with ample spare units, it would be unthinkable that if in the event of failure of one operating machine, the supposed back-ups could not be available for service for reasons that these equipments are undergoing maintenance or in a more horrible scenario, still waiting for spare parts to come.
THE PRODUCTION PLANT
One must appreciate that the scenario in a production or manufacturing line is quite different from that of a support plant described above. Most production lines are arranged in serial configuration such that a failure of one process equipment brings the entire plant to a halt as in the case of a Bottling Plant. The interruption means production downtime in terms of minutes or hours or in some cases, days. In these events, equipment breakdowns or maintenance failures are highly visible to top management owing to the loss of opportunity notwithstanding the shooting up of operating costs per unit product. A maintenance performance audit and monitoring is likewise necessary for standard setting, performance improvements and control. However, the standard parameters differ from that of a support plant.
SETTING-UP STANDARDS IN MAINTENANCE
With the discoveries following a system audit, it becomes necessary to set up standards of maintenance effectiveness on the basis of system availability or readiness. System Readiness in a way speaks of the capability of the system in a given time frame. It is also from this context that effective planning of maintenance activities and operations planning, as well must be based. Hence, in planning sessions where Maintenance, Operations & Production groups are in attendance, minimum set standards can be formulated based on critical scenarios.
HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE FITTED IN ESTABLISHED STANDARDS
Looking back to the historical performance gathered from the audit and making use of the established standards, charts will give insights on what happened to system availability or readiness within the subject years of the audit. From the charts, it would likely become evident that there are still much need for maintenance to improve particularly in systems which did not meet the minimum standards.
If and when the system readiness standards are attained through the concerted efforts of operations and maintenance groups, a smooth & uninterrupted plant operation can be assured. In effect, there is no substitute to planning in maintenance. But then, to properly plan the program, it is necessary for the operation group to be actively involved ensuring that a fair share of maintenance time and attention be given to each equipment. A Maintenance-Operation Master Plan becomes inevitable.
THE OPERATION–MAINTENANCE MASTER PLAN
With the standard properly established, what comes next is the conceptualization of a plant strategy in a yearly scope with the end view of injecting “just the right maintenance dose” to each major equipment of the plant. This means that the plan must not exceed the maintenance time allocated for each equipment.
Working as a team, Operations & Maintenance Groups shall formulate the master plan. This is to capture the relevance, practicability & attainability of the plan. Moreover, this strategy will make up the complete faith & commitment to the program and the belief of their capabilities to accomplish what they themselves had planned. Again a Master Plan in forms of Charts may be created and are expected to reap the following benefits:
1) Planning out for a realistic maintenance budget for the year,
2) Procurement of indented spare parts can realistically be programmed viz-a-viz the maintenance service schedule,
3) Equitable share of operation of the system equipment will be realized,
4) Implementation of the master plan as one of the specific objectives (SO’s) of the concerned parties can be made as basis in performance appraisals, thereby eliminating subjectivity,
5) Availability of system equipment is ensured at any point in time.
CONCLUSION
Measuring the effectiveness of maintenance had been proven to have tremendous benefits to management. As a management tool, it provides ease in planning, directing, controlling and implementing maintenance strategies towards a well-defined objective. Results of Maintenance Performance Measurement System should be made available to the people in terms of Daily, Weekly, Monthly and Year-to-Date Charts posted on bulletin boards indicating their performance. The system will boost the morale of the individual as well as the teams challenged for improved performance. The will to achieve and to be counted as one, will become a bandwagon.
It might after all not impossible to achieve that elusive “Zero Breakdown” mark.
DAA/June 2007
Quality maintenance is synonymous to quality product. This means that system equipment must be in tip-top condition, efficient, reliable and above all, available to service at any time they are needed. Quality maintenance in some plants is labelled as “Zero Production Downtime”, or in more strict fashion, others named it as “Zero Breakdown”. A “Zero Breakdown” policy can only be attained through a full time, whole-hearted and effective maintenance management, to include the commitment of top management. The key word here is “effective”. How effective the maintenance efforts are, is a question that every management should answer.
There are several ways in making a maintenance program in a plant. We say that a maintenance program is unique to every plant to fit different patterns of complexities in operation and to the different attributes of top level management policy towards maintenance. Some plants used to refer it as “Preventive Maintenance”, while others call it “Reliability Centered Maintenance” or others label it as “Total Productive Maintenance”. Whatever the program is, the objective is common - that is, to bring the plant to shape.
THE MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE AUDIT
It is important to mention that most manufacturing plants in the country today do not have any visible indicators of the effectiveness of their own maintenance programs.
In many instances, maintenance crew used to content themselves in having successfully weathered major breakdowns which may have earlier required a round-the-clock work. With all the adrenaline flowing, we may call it as “Magdamag Type Maintenance”.
But there can never be quality maintenance in this case, because after the euphoria of its “heroism”, comes the tendency to relax and be complacent from the true attributes of maintenance. What happens next is what we call “Pa-Easy Easy Na Lang Maintenance” or “Waiting-for-Trouble” maintenance. In short, our maintenance attitudes seem to follow a biorhythm cycle - ‘sometimes up, sometimes down’. What if the maintenance referred to in this discussion, is that of an airliner? Something therefore has to be done by way of controlling the direction of maintenance towards consistent and sustained effectiveness. This is what this author called, “Maintaining Maintenance”. Have we ever thought of how to maintain maintenance?
Establishment of a maintenance performance standard is very much wanting if we are determined to monitor and eventually improve its performance. One way to do this is to look into the past by conducting a SYSTEM AUDIT on historical performance levels, where the objectives towards improving them are anchored.
As examples of maintenance audits, two common scenarios can be used as pilot areas, to wit:
A Utilities/Support Plant which services the requirements of the production process, (a parallel configuration plant).
A Production Plant producing the main product line, (a serial configuration plant).
THE UTILITY/SUPPORT PLANT
It is typical for support plants like steam, water treatment, refrigeration or power generating plants supplying utilities for production processes to have over its maximum duties, substantial sizes and number of reserve equipment necessary for the continuity & reliability of its operation.
Note that because of the installed spare units in a ‘support plant’, system outages leading to production downtime are always averted, as failure of one equipment could not necessarily affect the operation of a production line at the other side of the wall.
Most support plants are in parallel configuration, or in a few instances, a combination of parallel and serial set-up, while production lines are usually arranged in serial configuration. In the absence of any maintenance audit however, individual equipment maintenance status could not be made readily visible to top management and even by the maintenance group themselves, thus explains the complacency towards the ever-readiness of system machineries.
In a System Audit, the most important parameter that higher management should monitor is the “EQUIPMENT READINESS or AVAILABILITY FACTOR” or to a greater view, the “SYSTEM READINESS or SYSTEM AVAILABILITY FACTOR”. Measuring effectiveness of maintenance is to see how consistently ready the system equipment are, or how capable the support systems are in meeting the variable demands of operation or production. In other words, given a system with ample spare units, it would be unthinkable that if in the event of failure of one operating machine, the supposed back-ups could not be available for service for reasons that these equipments are undergoing maintenance or in a more horrible scenario, still waiting for spare parts to come.
THE PRODUCTION PLANT
One must appreciate that the scenario in a production or manufacturing line is quite different from that of a support plant described above. Most production lines are arranged in serial configuration such that a failure of one process equipment brings the entire plant to a halt as in the case of a Bottling Plant. The interruption means production downtime in terms of minutes or hours or in some cases, days. In these events, equipment breakdowns or maintenance failures are highly visible to top management owing to the loss of opportunity notwithstanding the shooting up of operating costs per unit product. A maintenance performance audit and monitoring is likewise necessary for standard setting, performance improvements and control. However, the standard parameters differ from that of a support plant.
SETTING-UP STANDARDS IN MAINTENANCE
With the discoveries following a system audit, it becomes necessary to set up standards of maintenance effectiveness on the basis of system availability or readiness. System Readiness in a way speaks of the capability of the system in a given time frame. It is also from this context that effective planning of maintenance activities and operations planning, as well must be based. Hence, in planning sessions where Maintenance, Operations & Production groups are in attendance, minimum set standards can be formulated based on critical scenarios.
HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE FITTED IN ESTABLISHED STANDARDS
Looking back to the historical performance gathered from the audit and making use of the established standards, charts will give insights on what happened to system availability or readiness within the subject years of the audit. From the charts, it would likely become evident that there are still much need for maintenance to improve particularly in systems which did not meet the minimum standards.
If and when the system readiness standards are attained through the concerted efforts of operations and maintenance groups, a smooth & uninterrupted plant operation can be assured. In effect, there is no substitute to planning in maintenance. But then, to properly plan the program, it is necessary for the operation group to be actively involved ensuring that a fair share of maintenance time and attention be given to each equipment. A Maintenance-Operation Master Plan becomes inevitable.
THE OPERATION–MAINTENANCE MASTER PLAN
With the standard properly established, what comes next is the conceptualization of a plant strategy in a yearly scope with the end view of injecting “just the right maintenance dose” to each major equipment of the plant. This means that the plan must not exceed the maintenance time allocated for each equipment.
Working as a team, Operations & Maintenance Groups shall formulate the master plan. This is to capture the relevance, practicability & attainability of the plan. Moreover, this strategy will make up the complete faith & commitment to the program and the belief of their capabilities to accomplish what they themselves had planned. Again a Master Plan in forms of Charts may be created and are expected to reap the following benefits:
1) Planning out for a realistic maintenance budget for the year,
2) Procurement of indented spare parts can realistically be programmed viz-a-viz the maintenance service schedule,
3) Equitable share of operation of the system equipment will be realized,
4) Implementation of the master plan as one of the specific objectives (SO’s) of the concerned parties can be made as basis in performance appraisals, thereby eliminating subjectivity,
5) Availability of system equipment is ensured at any point in time.
CONCLUSION
Measuring the effectiveness of maintenance had been proven to have tremendous benefits to management. As a management tool, it provides ease in planning, directing, controlling and implementing maintenance strategies towards a well-defined objective. Results of Maintenance Performance Measurement System should be made available to the people in terms of Daily, Weekly, Monthly and Year-to-Date Charts posted on bulletin boards indicating their performance. The system will boost the morale of the individual as well as the teams challenged for improved performance. The will to achieve and to be counted as one, will become a bandwagon.
It might after all not impossible to achieve that elusive “Zero Breakdown” mark.
DAA/June 2007
2 comments:
This is a perfect guide towards a better Maintenance ensuring a "zero breakdown". Hope to have more informations on this topic
Yes, Jun. I have more to come. Just watch out for them.
Doods
Post a Comment