Welcome Shane who is the author of Decoding Mechanical Failures. More about Shane and Steel Image:

Shane is a mechanical engineer who founded Steel Image, whose primary business is analyzing information on broken parts: how it failed, mechanisms of failure, and whether the part was built correctly or not.

They avail all this information to aid those conducting RCAs.

In this episode we covered:

So all the information is available for those at the site level?

Yes. The basic information in conducting such analysis is learnt at apprenticeship yet it is not well disseminated across the other engineering disciplines. I resorted to disseminate this knowledge to other industries.

You made the shift from in-person to virtual training. Were there challenges in the conversion?

Yes, there was. In-person training uses 40-60 broken parts physically present and being examined by learners, which is engaging. Doing this online is a challenge and people are easily bored thus affecting retention.

To avert this, we prepared a workbook with 36 fracture surface images to teach what to look for, finding initiation sites, and commenting on the loading level. Etc.

What is Mechanical Failure?

They are fractures as a result of mechanical loading; cyclic loading, impact loading and overloading (without the contribution of corrosion, high temperature damage mechanisms)- entirely applied load.

It is essential as it is the first place you look at without specialized equipment and obtain the most information regarding the failure.

What is the process of diagnosing the failures?

Investigate if the loading was too high and was it expected or not.

How do the boxes work for fractures e.g. brittle?

Once the diagnosis is done, we give a series of factors to consider e.g. if diagnosed as a brittle fracture then it could be ductile; consider the following:

The training outlines how to identify the causes of failures.

Yes, it does. You have to test for both fatigue (Strength-based) and toughness. Differentiating the two helps in RCAs.

Why do most people find it difficult to study the fractures?

Most people do not know that they can do it. It can be difficult but learning the basics makes a big difference.

People often resort to switching from one tool or part to another without finding the actual cause of mechanical failures.

The only way to be sure of why the failure happened is by analyzing all the data around the fractured part. Reliability managers could use this analysis as a key tool in finding reasons for failures.

Why do you think this information is limited?

Enough effort and time was not spent in preparing enough material to communicate. To communicate the concept, you have to collect a lot of failure data to create a good package to disseminate.

It is inarguably a big step in improving RCAs in a reliability and maintenance engineering

The tool does not replace those available but shall only make them better.

If the failure has been identified as fatigue; where did it start from? Should the area be loaded or not? Are there unexpected stress concentrators or material flaws? Will the damage be introduced on a new part?

Without answering these questions then, it is often guess work

Carrying it out is essential because it needs to be done at the beginning of the failure analysis. It forms the foundation of all that follows in RCA.

It eliminates guess work in critical matters such as safety and product loss.

It is impressive because you do not need specialized equipment.

Define the threshold upon which you move from a basic visualization to a laboratory analysis. However, most of what happens in a lab is equally visual (which is critical) albeit the use of a microscope or a magnifying glass.

Challenge is the storage of a broken part; most people leave them to build up junk

Basic: Put it in a plastic bag, label it and date it.

Key takeaway

Eruditio Links:

Shane Turcott Links:

Download RSS iTunesStitcher

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 275 – Decoding Mechanical Failures: A class experience with Shane Turcott appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome James Reyes who is the author of Uptime and many other books, also a principal consultant at Conscious Asset. More about James:

Having a career that spans for 44 years, James has worked in different organizations and industries some of which include reliability on board both at sea and air. The guest began a reliability consulting career in 1995 focusing on the execution of reliability programs.

In this episode we covered:

A lot of organizations slashed spending on maintenance, training, and capital upgrades during the shutdown over the COVID-19 period. Is this impacting asset operations as they ramp up?

Yes, it is. And it is going to get worse. Companies slashed all training, improvement, and consultancy expenses. Without the training, the workforce's skills deteriorate and they do not learn anything new. Scaled down operations also means few challenges for them.

People in the workforce are afraid and therefore less focused. Also, during the pandemic, pieces of equipment were being run at low speeds giving a false image of longer uptime hence less maintenance. A ramp up will demand more from assets that haven't been maintained for a long time. Consequently, the equipment will break down causing more losses.

Do you believe organizations are aware of these challenges?

A lot of people aren't. There is a pent up demand for products yet nothing has been done to prepare assets for ramp up. A lot of people were laid off and most of the experienced talents are resorting to retirement after realizing the benefits of staying at home.

Less experienced and underprepared people are taking up management positions after shutdowns.

Supply chain is also a major challenge as parts and materials are taking longer lead time to arrive due to border restrictions and affected supply countries.

What types of Issues are companies going to face?

Training live shall also prove a challenge and costly given the circumstances. More so in the face of already available alternative use of online materials which are scalable, cheaper, and convenient.

The challenges are causing pressure on reliability managers yet they are things out of their control.

Yes. Managers are stressed managing teams that are in different locations. Already a high turnover is being experienced.

How do organizations reduce the risks of these challenges?

It won't be fixed immediately. The following are needed.

Do you believe organizations are still hunkered down?

What are organizations to do if something like this happens again?

Think longer term especially in the face of climate change. Every business needs to think about the impacts of the conditions to their business. Cutting costs isn't the only way during the pandemic.

The execution of such opportunities are not expensive, right?

Nothing in maintenance is complicated. Think and work smarter. A lot of challenges are yet to come- equipment breakdowns, high turnover rate

I have witnessed the same problems affecting my neighboring minivan factory. People are often out of work because of a shortage of parts from overseas.

That's because the parts are not manufactured here. The borders are closed. The government needs to better support the supply chain in this situation.

Eruditio Links:

James Reyes-Picknell Links:

Download RSS iTunesStitcher

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 274 – Dealing with Ramp Up and Degraded Assets with James Reyes-Picknell appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome Ron back to the podcast. Ron is an author and the founder of RM Group.

In this episode we covered:

What is OEE?

OEE refers to overall equipment efficiency. It is availability*Rate*quality. The concept was developed by Shinji Nakajima who wrote the book Total Preventive Maintenance . Reliability is not only about pieces of equipment in a production system.

Reliability is the ability of a system to produce a product: in time, in full, and at the lowest sustainable cost.

Pay attention to demand issues such as: changeover, transition losses, short stops, or equipment not being run properly.

Wasn't that the original intent of OEE?

Yes. If you consider the formula availability*Rate*quality. However, Nakajima did not consider or encourage the inclusion of demand issues such as transition losses, changeover, planned downtime, upstream supply failures.

He only focused on planned production time. But I say it is important to put the demand issues into consideration.

Think of OEE as a tactical means to count and manage losses.

It is also strategic in optimization of market opportunities'. Can be used to justify budget increment by showing what a system can best produce to maximize market opportunities.

Do companies use OEE simply because it is strategic and tactical?

Often OEE is misused by operations to look good and by management a club to put pressure on operations.

Does every company follow the availability*rate*quality?

A lot of organizations try to include more issues such as utilization then they give up and focus on one aspect or loss. This is wrong as the production system will always experience losses.

It is important to identify, measure, and decide if the losses are acceptable or not. Then manage them.

Is that how OEE should be used instead of the club approach ?

If used as a club, people will hide, become reactive and start gaming the system. Should only be used as a tool to manage losses. Any percentage of OEE is acceptable as long as the losses are being managed.

How do people game the system? How can they be stopped?

The system can be gamed by perhaps cutting short the breaks to compensate for the losses.

To stop the losses:

Why does maintenance get blamed for poor OEE? How can they leverage OEE?

Maintenance is blamed because of visibility: People see them working on breakdown. However, on average, maintenance only accounts for 3-10% of losses. They can leverage by:

Can maintenance use OEE to measure ROI on activities such as profit?

Yes. Gross profit, managing costs, and strategic improvements often demonstrate the worth of improved OEE. You will also see reduced safety incidents with improved OEE. The company shall also have less reactive maintenance, use less energy and be more environmentally friendly.

Where do we start?

Eruditio Links:

Ron Moore Links:

Download RSS iTunesStitcher

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 273 – Understanding and Leveraging OEE with Ron Moore appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome Cliff Williams back to the Podcast. Cliff is a principal advisor with People and Process as well as TMS Asset Management. The guest has also worked as an asset manager for many years.

In this episode we covered:

What's Cliff currently working on?

Presently we are leaning more towards asset management-trying to incorporate maintenance reliability into asset management.

What is operator care?

It implies that those who are operating any piece of the equipment are involved in reliability such that; they need to take care of the machine.

In fact, they are the closest to the machine enough to identify the issues and participate in finding the solutions.

It's like turning car renters into owners, correct?

Yes. It is about breaking the barrier between the operators and maintenance. The operators need to accept new challenges involved in addressing some of the issues that affect the pieces of equipment in their custody.

However, it requires a lot of change management.

How does operator care differ from autonomous management or TPM?

Autonomous maintenance is part of the operating context but it succeeds well if it goes along with preventive maintenance. Operator care on the other hand, looks at changing the role of the operator to assist in maintaining a required operating level.

Operator care does not really change the culture of the organization whereas autonomous maintenance requires culture change.

Where should we use operator care and autonomous maintenance?

It largely depends on the environment;

Autonomous maintenance is best suited for places with a lot of interaction between the operator and the machine or the product. The team is often large in this case. Whereas operator care works in places with minimal or no interaction with the machine. The operation is often computerized such that they only operate a system.

What prerequisites are often needed to implement operator care?

Involves defining what we are going to measure, the impact on people. But you cannot do it without work management,  Right?

Yes. People have to understand the expectations; anticipate how much will be done. Sell the idea of reporting issues that have to be worked on but also be clear that work management is key. Communicate that:

What level of planning is needed?

It's all about change management: you have to sell the idea (what are the desired outcomes and what is expected of the team?). Communicate well to avoid misleading information from other sources.

Anticipate areas you will experience resistance to the change and address them beforehand.

Some organizations simply put up names on a RACI chart and switch responsibilities but it doesn't work like that, does it?

That way both autonomous maintenance and operator care will fail.

About training:

So it is not just the what but also the how and why ?

Yes. The goals have to be clear to the team- if it's about improving availability or throughput.

What similarities are there among organizations that have succeeded in operator care?

The culture is more engaged and collaborative as opposed to command and control. People are often willing to take on extra tasks.

The maintenance team is more involved in value adding projects since operators are capable of taking on technical tasks.

Anything else you want to share?

Where do those who want to make a shift start?

Eruditio Links:

Cliff Williams Links:

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 272 – Operator Care: A Thought Out Approach with Cliff Williams appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome Joe Anderson and George Williams back to the podcast. They are the founders of ReliabilityX and are consultants as well as trainers. 

Briefly about them and Reliability X:

Reliability X covers all aspects of reliability; both operational and maintenance, coaching and currently creating online classes.

Joe Anderson has been in the pharma and food industries for 25 years before moving to consultancy.

George Williams has a background in pharma and medical devices rising from a technician over the years to a global reliability manager.

In this episode we covered:

What are operational standards?

It is a measure of excellence; what is currently being measured against the best practice in the industry then implementing changes needed to improve.

Is it creating benchmarks across a variety of areas of the company?

Why would we need operational standards?

Needed for consistency and repeatability for growth in achieving the best results.

It also makes business sense so that we do not only maintain machines for their sake but for the business' sake.

Are standards required in traditional companies or just in those embarking on TPM?

What is included in making operational standards?

Depends on the standards being developed; one-point lesson, single point lessons, knowledge standards.

If it is about a piece of equipment's operations, then make procedural standards. Make the standards visual using pictures instead of using words to describe the pictures. Also ensure that simplicity centers the standard making process.

Who develops standards?

It ought to be a cross-functional exercise-

Get pieces of excellence across the shifts and transfer the knowledge of how these are achieved.

Why is maintenance involved yet it is an operation?

Maintenance need to be involved because:

How do we make sure that a standard improves and evolves?

What improvements should we expect after implementing the standards?

However, change management is needed.

What advice do you have for those starting out?

What makes the biggest difference?

Key takeaways.

Eruditio Links:

George Williams and Joe Anderson Links:

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 271 – Developing Operational Standards with George Williams and Joe Anderson appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome Fred back to the podcast. Clients are starting to realize that they have to design their systems properly while paying attention to certain tradeoffs. However, tell us where they should start; whether to design for reliability or maintainability.

Before starting, the team has to look at their business goals and decide whether the acquisition of any system or a piece of equipment assists to that end. It has to be a business decision.

Pay attention to:

In this episode we covered:

The one thing I have noted in many cases is the inadequate control of a tool's specifications. It is necessary to ask what tool is needed and why. Do we need it for repeatability and what is its maintenance schedule? Asking this would completely change the decision making process.

If high volumes are demanded, then the tool or process should be designed for resilience and redundancy.

Understanding the tradeoffs is essential while keeping the important things in mind. Where do we place time and resources? Reliability or maintainability?

In making such decisions, most people resort to the theory of constraints: focusing on bottlenecks and ignoring the rest. For instance, I came by a process where the team paid attention to a bottler that can fill 450 bottles per minute and a labeler that can label 1000 in as much time. They diverted all their time and resources on the bottler yet the labeler could be down from time to time for 6 hours since it was ignored. They were missing on an opportunity by ignoring it.

They needed to rely on data and experience in making such decisions.

Once they have chosen to rely on data and experience? Where do they start in designing for maintenance or reliability?

Let's say you have properly designed your reliability or maintenance program properly. You also have the capability to collect and analyze data.

What you shouldn't do is bring in a piece of equipment that you do not have the tools or the expertise to maintain. Use what you already have to find an equipment that fits perfectly.

Pay attention to basics such as the brand. Involve the engineering team in finding what fits perfectly.

Create basic standards. Otherwise, the advanced things like the right model shall not matter. Basic aspects such as a complete bill of material that can be uploaded on to the CMMS, documentation should be taken into account. 

The decision making team needs to include the engineering people and not the vendor. The vendor has no idea about the usage and the working environment for the equipment.

The operating context needs to be specified, right?

Yes. Also define what you are already good at or the need to learn. Perhaps add new staff with a different set of skills.

Note that buying from the lowest bidder does not necessarily mean a low cost of ownership.

Just because the standards demand that you always purchase from the lowest bidder does not mean that you fail to pay attention to the cost of maintenance.

Think about the specifications, your operational requirements and storage of parts. For instance, there is no need in purchasing motors from different companies. Buying from different suppliers would mean purchasing and storing different spares. Stick to one brand to optimize the usage of parts.

Thinking about the long-term costs of maintenance is critical.

The best place to start is perhaps to read James' book Design for Maintainability .

A lot of basics such as paying attention to equipment specifications and operational context are in the book. There are other books by the same lead authors such as Design for Reliability .

The language in which you receive specifications and other documents is also essential. However, such are decisions that you need to make early before making the purchase.

Eruditio Links:

Fred Schenkelberg Links:

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 270 – Where to Start with DfM & DfR with Fred Schenkelberg appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome Simon back to the podcast. Simon is the founder of Samotics and has been involved in technology throughout his Career. Today we will talk about capabilities trap. Although briefly, tell us more about you:

Involved with technology, our guest focuses on: machine learning, and the conversion of data into information.

In this episode we covered:

What is a capabilities trap?

Despite its inherent operational and financial benefits, technology is sparingly adopted across all industries. Prof. John Sterman explains this in the article The Capability Trap: Prevalence in Human Systems . Briefly, the articles states;

It basically refers to sacrificing everything for the short-term, right?

Yes, because unlike investing in long-term improvement processes (training, technology, maintenance), there are immediate short-term gains.  Besides, investment in these improvement processes has a worse before better phase. Sometimes the benefits might arise but it will be difficult to conclusively link them to the investments.

Why should we be aware of capabilities trap? How do we manage it?

Neglecting capabilities trap will result in reduction of production capacity over time. Machines will fail, the organization will fall back in terms of technology, and people's skills will erode. If you opt for these improvements, you must be willing to withstand the worse before better period. Though it is a challenge because managers are judged on short-term gains.

How do managers create a balance between being judged on short and long-term gains?

What does capabilities trap mean to maintenance innovation technology?

Investment in technology has a lot of benefits but you shouldn't always expect immediate returns. After a new technology is adopted performance will drop in the learning period.

In reliability, you must focus on the end result while capitalizing on the present opportunities. Pay attention to the technology; some can do one thing well (isolated tech) but not fit in the system in pursuit of the goal.

Have a clear road map because the more the complexities the more capabilities trap will manifest. If it gets too complex, desire for immediate performance rises and people sacrifice the long-term goal.

We call it the value of despair -trying to adopt new systems but people are still stuck in the old culture and eventually performance drops.

People often blame culture because it cannot be quantified to reveal culpability in the team. Prof. Sterman takes a systems modelling approach to explain the performance drop; If you work longer hours there will be no time to innovate. Consequently, your capabilities will erode.

Although we cannot quantify culture, it has a direct influence on organizational performance.

How do we overcome the capabilities trap?

Have you seen the results of ignoring the capabilities trap?

Yes. At a personal level; opting to work harder when things do not work out instead of being smart about it. Also, USA Airlines opted to lay off its skilled workers to cut costs during the pandemic but now travels have resumed and their ratings are plummeting.

What is the key takeaway?

Expect the worse before better phase in adoption of technology. Take the long-term view to help through it.

Eruditio Links:

Simon Jagers Links:

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 269 – The Capabilities Trap with Simon Jagers appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome Rick Clonan who has been in maintenance for 30 years working both in defense and industry. More about Rick:

Currently at SMRP working as implementation and training manager.

In this episode we covered:

How do we communicate the value of PdM and PM?

Consider the following:

Combine the two to measure and communicate the value of PMs.

What is/isn't a PM?

They include:

What about PMs with instructions to inspect and replace if necessary ?

PMs have to be intentional whether you find mistakes or not.

How do we know whether PMs are effective or not?

You have to measure it from two perspectives:

At SMRP we use PM Yield: Take the amount of corrective work found in PM and divide by PM work in hours to produce a ratio.

How do these help communicate the value of our PM?

Do we look at PM to corrective maintenance ratio at an individual or macro level?

Always view it at a program level because its yield should be the same for all assets. Assess the program not the asset.

Have you ever heard of the 6:1 Rule?

Micro and macro metrics are often interchanged right?

So should we view all these metrics together for the full picture?

Separately assess these two:

They could show:

Do we have to stick to PM schedule to get the right measurements?

There is a 10% rule where you can always start two days prior to or after the scheduled PM date.

Some may do PMs at any time in a month but this implies they won't be well spaced and won't stick to 6:1 rule.

How do we link all these to get operation's cooperation?

With all these we can then communicate?

What makes the biggest difference?

Communicate PM outputs in terms of asset availability, uptime, product losses, overhead labor costs.

Key takeaway

Eruditio Links:

Bennett Fitch Links:

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 268- Understanding & Communicating the Value of PMs with Rick Clonan appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome Bobby Lee who has been involved in maintenance engineering working for different companies in various capacities.

Bobby Lee started out as a maintenance apprentice and has risen through the ranks as a maintenance engineer for over 9 years.

In this episode we covered:

What does it mean to manage up?                    

Managing up means taking up responsibilities of a senior role while still working in a junior position. Occurs in instances where your superior isn't present or is indisposed to execute their mandate.

It is intimidating because peers are aware of your junior capacity but the responsibility to lead rests with you. Whoever is in charge can also trust a junior staff with their responsibilities.

Why would someone need to manage up?

It happens when one steps up to lead the team in different situations. Perhaps in absence of a supervisor or a planner. Situations may also rise where one needs to go out of their way and present solutions, and to get others on board.

Give examples of moments that you had to manage up?

A maintenance superintendent wasn't present and I had to attend meetings together with superiors. It also happened to be a day when many machines had broken down. One of the solutions was to ask an older team colleague to change work stations to an area they had expertise.

The key was to ask them while mentioning that I would attend to the task if it were possible. They were more skilled and I couldn't be in more than one place at a time.

What advice is there for a technician who finds themselves in such circumstances?

Have you ever gotten a pushback from the teams you have managed up?

Yes. But the solution was to provide alternatives to let them choose the best one  for them. I explained to them why I was asking and showed them what they stand to gain if they performed the task. Perhaps mentioned how it could   help them achieve their targets or makes their work easier.

It is usually not the time to present the bigger picture i.e. company goals. Instead, explain to them what they, as individuals, stand to gain from doing the task.

How intimidating is it?

Managing up can be intimidating because you have to offer input on behalf of your superiors. This happens in the presence of other senior leaders.

The secret is to lay down the data to put your point across. Be confident and speak up to offer your perspective in the topic at hand. If you do not agree with a point in such a scenario, then speak up and present your input.

How do people prepare to manage up?

It comes naturally to most people. They make an effort to know what different team members do exemplarily well. It is important to take initiative in scenarios where no one else would. Most importantly, be efficient and good at what you do.

Have conversations with people and follow through with tasks to completion to build leadership capital.

What makes the biggest difference?

Key takeaway.

Eruditio Links:

Bobby Lee Links:

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 267 – Managing Up with Bobby Lee appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Welcome Dane Boers who is the founder of Modeler. Our topic will be asset modelling.

More about Dane:

Dane started his career in mining then moved to consultancy before starting Modeler. The company was started to make reliability more efficient and automated because of the repetitive work he had observed.

In this episode we covered:

What is asset modeling?

It is the digitization of asset knowledge. The idea is to develop a framework that combines tools such as work plans and working instructions into a structure that can be used to answer business-related questions.

The goal is to have one centralized store of knowledge about an asset class. For instance, everything about pumps are fed into one structure i.e. A pumps failure data, failure mode details, decision making logics e.tc gets captured in one place.

The information assists in answering queries related to budgeting and optimization of maintenance strategy etc.

What is an asset class?

Refers to a group of assets that share a lot of information that can be used to put them together.

Does asset modeling take into account the failure modes in the operational context; what's impactful and what's not?

Yes. It takes into account the failure mode and all the factors that can change the probability of that failure mode happening. Such factors might be environmental conditions and operational parameters. All these are inputs in the model.

The model then creates relationships between these factors and failure modes to provide links that can drive decisions.

So it gives an insight about what could happen and what to do about it?

Yes. It is all about statistical probability that updates predictions regarding asset failures with reasons for the same. However, there is still an element of variance and unknown.

How can companies leverage this asset model to develop effective strategy?

To understand how to leverage it requires an understanding of how the model works. It has 3 components;

If it is about RCM, of importance is that all RCM related information about an asset is logically fed into the system if a query is about RCM optimization. The information could be inspections, overhauls, and subtasks to be performed. The query then could be: which of the tasks gives the best cost-benefit or life cycle cost. The model then analyses the information and gives a calculated, best alternative.

What type of data do we need?

It starts from a specific asset e.g. a pump; inputs can be the type of pump. Perhaps a centrifugal pump and the fluid that flows through the pump. Then move to the next type of pump and build a model based on the same inputs.

The inputs are then linked to turning on and off of certain components and changing failure distribution. The model improves and grows with varying operational contexts.

The basic data that you need; date of installation, equipment age, type of pump, types of fluid, impeller size etc. The model increases the need to have more data because they are connected to asset performance.

What other outputs are there apart from effective strategy?

It depends on the type of queries you have for the model. There are varying uses ranging from budgeting, equipment selection depending on operational context, intervention tradeoffs depending on the information fed in the model.

Can we update the inputs after perhaps selecting an equipment to capture the operational context?

Yes. In fact, RCA outcomes, mitigating tasks, and problem trees can be updated into the model. However, single case failures may not skew the model as much. Longer period of repetitive failures is needed for the model to produce actionable predictions.

Optimization of the model is to link back and find out what the new input means to the failure mode.

Would having a good asset hierarchy help build the model?

We tend to take a subject matter expert (SME) approach when starting out. This is because of the expert knowledge of what is important and what isn't. However, certain important issues may not be quantified or recorded in usable data form but affect failure mode. In that case, we adjust failure rates using the SME approach.

It is preferred to start modeling at the asset level rather than system level.

Do you ever see clients experiment with different assets concurrently to see which one performs better?

Yes. Especially in equipment selection. Say; selection of electric pole materials while considering geographical, climate and environmental factors.

One thing that makes the biggest difference:

Apart from asset knowledge, linking factors to failure modes, it is essential to understand that the data in our procession is imperfect. You need to use the best assumptions in such gaps until you find better data.

Key takeaway

The industry is moving towards data-based, prescriptive recommendations. We need to structure the data to suit this.

Eruditio Links:

Dane Boers Links:

Rooted In Reliability podcast is a proud member of Reliability.fm network. We encourage you to please rate and review this podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. It ensures the podcast stays relevant and is easy to find by like-minded professionals. It is only with your ratings and reviews that the Rooted In Reliability podcast can continue to grow. Thank you for providing the small but critical support for the Rooted In Reliability podcast!

The post 266 – Asset Modeling with Dane Boers appeared first on Accendo Reliability.