p roblems, and getting their ideas on how we can improve the design’. Certainly these are important, but not likely to be sufficient. Let’s ask the following: A.In light of the failure modes analysis described above, how will you modify the design of your equipment to eliminate, mitigate or better manage (through condition monitoring methods that allow early detection of problems) these failure modes? If condition monitoring technologies or methods are applied, please describe those that apply, including their potential costs and benefits. Include in your discussion a review of the application of continuous monitoring. B.Describe 3 or 4 design changes that have been made as a result of working with your customers, and why. What additional efforts are currently on-going for improved reliability and maintainability in the equipment? C.Attached is a listing of several problems that we have had in reliability and maintainability. Please provide us with a description as to how you will address and resolve these problems in the design to assure improved reliability and maintainability. D.Will approval of your drawings be permitted, and if so, in sufficient time to allow for equipment modifications and still meet the project schedule? Please outline your plans. Experience with Reliability and Maintainability When asked about their specific experience in providing reliable, readily maintainable equipment, or more to the point, when asked about the reliability of the equipment being procured, a typical reply f rom the supplier might be ‘This equipment has been installed in many places throughout the world, and has operated very re l i a b l y. In particular, this equipment was installed at the First-Up plant, and had few difficulties during commissioning, and is currently running re l i a b l y. I t ’s also been installed at the Next-Other plant. Let’s ask the following: At the First-Up and Next-Other plants, please respond to the following for each plant: A.What has been the historical average % unplanned maintenance downtime? B.What is the mean time between repair? C. What is the mean time to repair? D.What are the five most common failure modes? E.What is being done in the design to mitigate or eliminate these reliability and maintainability issues? F. How long did the commissioning process take to achieve full, sustainable production rates? How many failures and of what duration occurred during that period? Did any supplied parts exceed the guaranteed failure rate? G.What were the major problems encountered during commissioning? H.What design changes have been made to minimize these commissioning problems? I. What is the standard commissioning process? We desire that the equipment run at least one full production cycle while maintaining full production requirements. We also desire that this same test be repeatable within 6 months of initial commissioning. Please describe your process for meeting these requirements. J . We desire a mean time between failure (MTBF) of not less than _____ hours. For our purpose, a failure is defined as anything that occurs with the equipment that results in any downtime, p roduction rate reduction, or quality loss. For example, at a ____% confidence level, this re q u i res that we have no more than ____ f a i l u res during a ____hour period. Please aff i rm your commitment to running a commissioning test over the period stated with these specific confidence limits, and pre d e t e rmined number of failure s , or offer your alternative that will meet this need. Developing Suppliers That Provide Reliability and Maintainability K.Could you arrange for our engineers and purchasing people to visit these two plants, and perhaps other plants, to review their practices and performance? PM and Spares Requirements When asked about PM and spares re q u i rements, and how they are developed, vendor responses vary considerably. A typical answer might be ‘Spares recommendations are based on our experience and on feedback from our customers, separated into capital spares and routine wear parts, with expected lifetimes.’ What this means is not very clear. To add greater clarity, let’s ask the following: A.What statistical methods and other techniques were used to convert your experience and feedback into spares recommendations and PM intervals? In light of the failure modes described above, and assuming the failure modes cannot be entirely eliminated in the design, describe how these PM will assure mitigation and/or early detection of these failure modes. Describe how the spares recommended are to be used for better managing these failure modes. B.Please provide one example of each major component analysis, wherein techniques such as RCM, FMEA, PM Optimization were used in conjunction with statistical failure and wear data to determine PM requirements and intervals and spare parts requirements. Training Training is critical for the proper startup, operation and maintenance of new equipment. A typical question might be ‘What level of training is re q u i red for operators and maintainers for equipment of this type?’ A typical answer might be ‘We do good training, and much of the equipment is automated, minimizing the need for training.’ Increased automation is more likely to increase the complexity of the equipment, resulting in a need for greater skill and competency in our staff, not less, particularly during problem analysis and corre c t i v e action. With this in mind: A.Describe the operator training, as well as mechanical and electrical maintenance training required to assure world-class practice, including a detailed outline of all training and support requirements that will be necessary for supporting the reliable operation and maintenance of the equipment. Summary Using the model outlined above should be an integral part of an overall strategy for minimizing the total cost of ownership for major capital equipment. The key to using this approach is having a good understanding of your current operating results and problem are a s , the failure modes most likely to result in lost production, downtime, or high costs; or that may have the most severe consequence to your overall operation. Having a good understanding of these issues will a s s u re that you can work with your supplier to eliminate, mitigate, and manage these risks; and that you can minimize your total cost of ownership, and be more profitable. Many of you may be far along the path for this and have more detailed processes to achieve the above re q u i rements. No doubt others would consider these re q u i re m e n t s beyond the scope of many of your procurement efforts. Somewhere in the middle are many of you who could use this model to more fully develop your re q u i rements for improving reliability and maintainability. Hopefully the suggestions above will help you in that effort. Ron Moore is Managing Partner of The RM Group, Inc., Knoxville, TN, and author of Making Common Sense Common Practice: Models for Manufacturing Excellence from Butterworth-Heinemann. He can be contacted by telephone at 865-675-7647; or by email at RonsRMGp@aol.com. 40
MEX operates on all current Windows platforms including ‘95 ‘98 ‘00 NT & XP. It also allows the user to report directly into Word, Excel and Access. It is recommended that you have at least 32 Mb Ram, 152 Mb Hard Disk space and an 800 x 600 display option with 256 colours. Other solutions available from Maintenance Experts include: FLEETMEX, MEX OPS, MEX STORES, EASYTIME, FUEL MEX, MEX LINKS & MEX INSPECTIONS. Your Maintenance - Our Expertise. Over 2400 Users Worldwide
Change language