Another reason, Captain Haynes said that so many people lived was preparation. They were prepared to handle an emergency. He closed his presentation by urging the audience to consider the things that will probably never happen and to prepare for them. His words were, “Be as prepared as you possibly can.”
Captain Al Haynes
“Be as prepared as you possibly can.” These are powerful words when it comes to asset management—especially when considering the types of assets custodians are responsible for and the communities they serve. Organizations need to be prepared to meet mission requirements, production commitments, scheduling constraints, safety goals, environmental regulations, cutbacks of all kinds, quality goals, and cost commitments. Therefore, assets must perform as required.
If an organization seeks to be as prepared as it possibly can, who is in the best position to identify and accomplish what that takes? Is it an outside contractor? The equipment manufacturer? The systems engineer? The operator? The maintainer? What one person knows it all? In most cases, there isn’t just one person, especially when considering all of the elements that influence a system.
2.2 Elements that Influence a System
As discussed in Chapter 1 and shown in Figure 1.1, there are many elements that influence a system including: proactive maintenance, operating procedures, technical publications, training programs, equipment design, supply issues, operational tempo and environment, and emergency procedures. The range of issues that directly affect how equipment operates makes it almost impossible for one person to know everything about an asset and what is required for it to meet requirements.
It doesn’t matter what is analyzed—an airplane, nuclear power plant, truck, tank, ship, offshore oil platform, mobile air conditioning unit, tow tractor, jet engine or a single pump. Whatever the asset is, responsible custodianship means identifying and developing comprehensive failure management strategies.
2.3 Failure Management Strategies
When formulating failure management strategies to maintain assets, organizations typically focus on the development of a proactive maintenance program. However, there are many other failure management strategies that are almost always required to ensure an asset meets requirements. Examples of these are shown in Figure 1.4; they include new operating procedures, updates to technical publications, modifications to training programs, equipment redesigns, supply process changes, enhanced troubleshooting procedures, and updated emergency procedures. Where, then, can the information required be obtained to formulate these solutions?
2.4 Historical Data and the RCM Process
One place to turn is historical data. Historical data is important and can be incredibly useful. But without exception, the kind of data that is generally collected isn’t sufficient to answer all the questions in the RCM process—and, thereby, formulate specific solutions. In many cases, the kind of data collected for assets can be likened to baseball statistics. Figure 2.1 presents a season’s batting statistics for batter Smith.
Figure 2.1 One season’s batting statistics for player Smith
Player Smith’s batting average is .204, which means the batter gets a hit approximately twice out of every ten at-bats. He has 21 runs batted in (RBI) and six home runs. By reviewing the data, the batting coach can conclude that batter Smith needs improvement. This is valuable information because now the batting coach knows where resources need to be designated—helping to improve batter Smith’s performance. However, what the batting coach cannot deduce from reviewing the data is what is causing batter Smith to perform poorly so the coach cannot formulate specific solutions to help the batter improve. For example, should the batter start to swing a little earlier? Or maybe a little later? Or maybe the batter needs to change his stance. The solutions cannot be determined just by evaluating the data.
Historical data for assets is often of the same ilk. For example, a review of bearing data can reveal that 50 bearings were replaced last year—up from 20 last year. From this review, the equipment custodian can conclude that there is a problem regarding the bearing. However, what specifically caused the 50 bearing failures cannot be identified simply from reviewing the data. For example, were the bearings greased improperly? Were they not greased at all? Was the wrong grease used? Was there a manufacturing defect? Were the bearings fitted improperly? There are many issues that could specifically cause the bearing failures. So while the data is valuable because it allows an equipment custodian to zero in on problem areas and, thereby, allocate resources where they can be of most benefit, the data doesn’t reveal exactly what is causing the bearing problem.
The Use of Historical Data in an RCM Analysis
When historical data is available, it should be employed in the RCM process. For example, historical data is typically very useful for determining items with high failure rates and high maintenance man-hour consumers. The data allows an organization to focus in on problem areas and assists in prioritizing the systems that will be subject to RCM analysis. In this way, resources are allocated where they would be most beneficial.
Where Historical Data Often Falls Short
Historical data can be incomplete because it typically:
•Reports only what failed
•Describes what was done to repair the failure rather than what caused it
•Doesn’t describe failures that are currently being prevented or plausible failures that haven’t occurred
•Describes failures which may be the effect of some other failure
•Offers inadequate information for determining On-Condition, Restoration, and Replacement task intervals
The use of historical data in an RCM analysis plays a very important role in the application of RCM, but the data is often incomplete and requires further explanation. So, if historical data is often incomplete to perform an RCM analysis, where can an organization turn to get the information?
None of us is as smart as all of us. Ken Blanchard
Organizations can capture an enormous amount of information by asking the right people; this tool is one of the most valuable tools in any RCM analysis. When a working group is assembled, there are typically over 100 years of cumulative experience at an organization’s disposal. Because of the vast and varied experience and perspectives represented, the group shares a unique opportunity to formulate solutions that can make a remarkable difference to the organization. By turning to people who know where the improvement opportunities are, skilled facilitators can use RCM principles to consolidate their knowledge and lead experts