Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Author:
Prof. Dr. Attia H. Gomaa
Head of Industrial Eng. Department - Fayoum University
Industrial Engineering Consultant - AUC
Maintenance Engineering Consultant - EMC
attiagomaa@yahoo.com
2006
2 / 150
LEVEL I
TRADITIONAL MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT
Or
The combination of activities by which a facility is kept
in, or restored to, a state in which it can perform its
acceptable standard.
Maintenance Policies
To Keep
Planned Maintenance
- Time Based Maintenance
- Condition Based Maintenance
- Risk Based Maintenance
To Restore
Unplanned Maintenance
- Corrective Maintenance
- Run To Failure
- Emergency Maintenance
- Break down Maintenance
3 / 150
4 / 150
What is the
Maintenance?
1How to keep or
restore the facility at
acceptable standard
level in certain
operating conditions?
2How to prevent the
failures?
Example:
System/equipment description
Main parameters
Main items
Functional block diagram
Criticality
Working conditions
Main failures:
PM:
Main failures:
Policy:
Main failures:
Policy:
Main failures:
Risk:
Policy:
5 / 150
6 / 150
According to maintenance
information availability:
(1)
Complete
Information
(2)
Incomplete
information
Planned PM
Planned CM
70 %
20%
(3)
Without information
Unplanned CM
(or Emergency)
10%
Maintenance Works
Planned
% 70
PM
% 45
Repairs
% 25
Unplanned
% 30
Minor repairs
% 20
Repairs
% 10
7 / 150
Experience
Maintenance
Planner
Tools
Information
Experience:
Technical
Planning
Analysis
Decision making
Problem solving
Working conditions, etc.
Information:
Catalog
Forms / reports
Data collection
PM levels
Job plans for each PM level
Resources
Cost rates
CM work orders
Failure analysis, etc.
Tools:
Computer programs
International standards
Management tools, etc.
8 / 150
9 / 150
Cost
PM level
10 / 150
11 / 150
12 / 150
2nd generation
1st generation
Fix it when it
broke
2000
1990
No damage to
Longer equipment life environment
1980
1970
1960
1950
Customer
Satisfaction
Time
13 / 150
1940
What is to be maintained?
Why?
How?
By whom?
When?
Where?
"Description"
"Target"
"Method"
"Resources"
"Schedule"
"Location"
2 to 10 y
6m to 1 y
Risk 15 to 25%
Risk 7 to 10%
14 / 150
Short term
1w to 3 m
Risk 3 to 5%
3- MM risk plans:
Target plan (normal or most likely)
Optimistic plan (best case)
Pessimistic plan (worst case)
4- MM Strategic Plans:
Strategic plan
Tactical plan
Operational plan
Urgent plan
5- MM Planning Level:
Overall plan
Partial plan
Urgent plan
Complete information
Incomplete information
Without information
Maintenance
processes
Facility / Plan
at acceptable
standard
Reports-
16 / 150
Multi-stage
centrifugal pump
Environment
Motor
Pump
rev/min 1800
B1
B2
ton/hr 35
bar 60
Coupling specifications:
Strainer specifications:
17 / 150
Current PM Program:
Item
Job plan
Frequenc
y
(1)
Motor
(2)
Coupling
(3)
Pump
(4)
Suction
line
(5)
Discharge
line
(6)
Valves
18 / 150
Main Failures
Root Cause
(1)
Motor
(2)
Coupling
(3)
Pump
(4)
Suction
line
(5)
Discharge
line
(6)
Valves
19 / 150
MTBF
1) Motor:
Failure
PM
Policy
Freq.
PrD
Policy
2) Coupling:
3) Pump:
4) Suction line:
5) Discharge line:
6) Valves:
20 / 150
CM
Freq.
Developed PM Program:
Item
Job plan
(1)
Motor
(2)
Coupling
(3)
Pump
(4)
Suction
line
(5)
Discharge
line
(6)
Valves
21 / 150
Frequency
OSM
Improve
equipment
availability
Maintenance
information
analysis and
Using optimal
mathematical
modeling
TPM
Improve overall
system
productivity
System overall
analysis
System reliability
analysis
Continuous
improvement
techniques
22 / 150
Maintenance Policies
(5 )
( 1)
Failure-Based
Reactive (ReM):
- RTF
- CM
- BD
(2)
::
Time-Based
Preventive (PM):
- Calendar:
Weekly
Monthly
::
- Running:
1000 R.H.
1000 K.M.
::
(3)
Condition-Based
Predictive (PdM):
- Oil analysis
- Vibration analysis
- Temperature analysis
- Pressure analysis
- Wear analysis
- Efficiency analysis
::
Total-Based
Global (GM):
- OSM
- TPM
::
(4)
Risk-Based
Proactive (PaM):
- RCFA
- FMEA \ FMECA
- HAZOP
- RCM \ RCM2
- RBI ::
Policy
Approach
Goals
Reactive
Minimize maintenance
costs for non-critical
equipment.
Preventive
Predictive
Maintenance decision
based on equipment
condition.
Proactive
Global
Integrated approach.
23 / 150
Policy
Approach
Goals
RCFA
Identification of root
causes of failures.
Eliminate failures.
FMECA
Identification of
criticality of failures.
Improve equipment
availability.
HAZOP
Identification of
hazards and problems
associated with
operations.
RCM
Determination of best
maintenance
requirements for
critical systems.
Preserve system
function & improve
reliability.
RBI
Determination of an
optimum inspection
plan for critical
systems.
Policy
Approach
OSM
Optimization
Maximize reliability measures
approach for the
and minimize maintenance
global maintenance
cost rates.
system.
TPM
Comprehensive
productivemaintenance
system.
Goals
24 / 150
PM = Profit
25 / 150
26 / 150
2.
Equipment selection
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
27 / 150
Description
HSE - Process Down time Cost
Critical equipment
Non-critical equipment
Maintenance catalog Design
information Equipment historyWorking conditions- PMs CMs
Trouble shooting Reliability
information HSE instructions. etc.
4. Target &
Targets: Reliability, Availability,
constraints
Down time, Cost, HSE level, .. etc.
definitions
Constraints: Budget, Spare parts,
Tools, Manpower, Information,etc.
5. Requirements & Functional levels: Flow rate, Head,
standard levels
Pressure, Power, .. etc.
HSE levels
6. Main failures
Functional failures - HSE failures
determination
Mechanical failures Electrical
failures - .. etc.
7. Root Cause
Main failures, Root cause, RRC,
Failure Analysis
Mechanism, Probability, MTBF,
MTTR, Remedy.
8. Best maintenance Run To Failure (RTF)
policy
Time-based (Preventive) PM
Condition-based (Predictive) PdM
Risk-based (Proactive) PrM
28 / 150
Description
Frequency- Levels- Alarm limits- ToolsJob plan- HSE plan- Spare partsDuration- Manpower- .. etc.
10. Work orders
W/O # - W/O type- Dates/time Responsibility- Level - Alarm limitsTools- Job plan- HSE plan- Spare
parts- Duration- Manpower- Failure Root cause- .. etc.
Complete Feedback.
11. Measure
Running hours- Noise- VibrationTemperature- Oil level- viscosity- Flow
rate Head Speed - .. etc.
12. Analysis
Noise analysis- Vibration analysis
Temperature analysis - Oil analysis Flow rate analysis Head analysis
Speed analysis - .. etc.
13. Action
- Good condition
- Call for service (PM)
- Call for repair (planned CM)
- Breakdown (unplanned CM)
14. Performance
CM/PM- MTBF- MTTR- MTBMevaluation & KPI MTTM- Reliability AvailabilityMaintainability- RAM- Spare parts
consumption rates- .. etc.
15. Improvement
Information Maintenance levelsTools Spare parts Manpower skills
Time HSE - .. etc.
Approach: FMEA - RCM - RBIPMIS - .. etc.
Fundamentals Maintenance Management
Dr. Attia H. Gomaa
29 / 150
30 / 150
Spare
parts
and
supplies
planning,
11-
12-
Failure analysis,
13-
14-
15-
Safety instructions.
31 / 150
requirement
Planning Section:
Craft Feedback:
Coding:
Plant (or department), Equipment
Resources (Manpower, Spare parts, Special tools)
32 / 150
3- Maintenance Control
Total Control Indicators:
1- Work quantity control
Over estimation
Under estimation
2- Time control
Behind schedule (late)
Ahead schedule (early)
3- Cost control
Cost overrun
Cost under-run
4- Quality control
Acceptable level
Non-acceptable level
5- Inventory control
Over estimation
Under estimation
6- Resources control
Over estimation
Under estimation
7- Plant condition control (HSE, etc.)
Acceptable level
Non-acceptable level
33 / 150
Control Steps:
1- What to control?
2- What is the standard (target) performance?
3- What is the actual performance level?
4- Comparison between the actual & target.
5- Detection of variance
6- Identification of causes of variance
7- Corrective actions
8- Learned lessons.
Total Control Levels:
1- Review and data collection.
2- Follow-up.
3- Performance evaluation.
4- Productivity analysis.
5- Corrective actions.
6- Learned lessons.
System Effectiveness
Efficiency
&Utilization
Resource productivity
Availability
Reliability
MTBF
MTBM
Maintainability
MTTR
MTTM
34 / 150
35 / 150
36 / 150
Productivity:
It is a combination of both effectiveness & efficiency.
Productivity index
= Output obtained / Input expended
= Performance achieved / Resources consumed
Total productivity = Total output / Total input
Partial productivity = Total output / One of the inputs
MEASUREMENT OF MAINTENANCE EFFECTIVENESS
Equipment Losses Categories
Category
Equipment losses
Indicator
Down-time losses Equipment failures
Equipment
(lost availability)
Set-up and adjustments
availability
Speed losses
Idling and minor
Equipment
(lost performance) stoppages
performance
Reduced speed operation efficiency
Defect losses
Scrap and rework
Equipment quality
(lost quality)
Start-up losses
Rate
Resource losses
Critical resource
Resource
consumption rates
productivity
Cost losses
All the previous losses
Repair cost
CM/PM cost ratio
Down time cost
Overall equipment effectiveness (OEE)
OEE = Equipment Availability Performance efficiency Quality rate
37 / 150
OEE
30 50 %
Good PM Program
Good bonus & incentive system
Good PM Program based on RCM
Good bonus & incentive system
60 80 %
More than 80 %
Product quality
Production continuity & rates
Shutdown frequency
HSE factors
Equipment availability
Resource availability
Operating & maintenance cost
Down time cost rate
38 / 150
10 - 15 15 - 25
2
3
Medium High
Risk 15 to 25%
Risk 7 to 10%
Risk 3 to 5%
Severity
No
Very low
(Slight)
Low
(Not Serious)
Medium
(Serious)
High
(Very Serious)
Very High
(Catastrophic)
Safety (people)
Does not apply
Slight injury
Simple first aid
Minor injury
No lost time
No Hospitalize
First aid
Major injury
Lost time
Hospitalize
Temporary disability
Fatal injury
Hospitalize
Permanent disability
Multiple fatalities
> 25
4
Major
39 / 150
S d
x 100%
S
Percentage of downtime = Id = 100% - A
Availability = A =
S d
f
df
40 / 150
31 6
A = 31 x 100% = 80.6 %
Id = 100 - 80.6 = 19.4%
31 6
MTBF =
= 8.33 days
3
6
MTTR=
= 2 days
3
Maintenance Administration Indicators (%):
1- Overtime hours per month
2- Worker activity level
3- Worker productivity
4- Worker utilization
5- Scheduled hours
6- Preventive & predictive
Maintenance Effectiveness Indicators (%):
1- Overall effectiveness
2- Gross operating hours
3- Number of failures
4- Breakdown downtime
5- Emergency man-hours
6- Predictive & preventive
Maintenance Cost Indicators (%):
1- Maintenance cost
2- Maintenance cost/unit
3- Maintenance manpower cost
4- Subcontracted cost
5- Cost of maintenance-hour
Fundamentals Maintenance Management
Dr. Attia H. Gomaa
41 / 150
6- Supervision cost
7- Preventive maintenance cost
8- Cost of spare parts
x 100
x 100
x 100
S = Speed indicator
42 / 150
Availability = A =
Speed = S =
Quality = Q =
x 100
43 / 150
Emergency man-hours % =
Man - hours spent on emergency jobs
Total direct maintenance hours worked
x 100
x 100
Cost of maintenance-hour = $ =
Total cost of maintenance
Total man - hours worked
44 / 150
45 / 150
4- Computerized CMMS
More than 100 Ready-Made Packages
Most common CMMS:
EMPAC
www.plant-maintenance.com
FMMS
www.kdr.com.au
GPS5
www.gps5.com
IMAINT
www.dpsi.com
IMPACT-XP
www.impactxp.com
IMPOWER
www.impower.co.uk
MAINPAC
www.mainpac.com.au
MAINPLAN
www.mainplan.com
MAXIMO
www.maximo.com
MP2
www.datastream.net
OEE MANAGER www.zerofailures.co.uk
OEE SYSTEMS www.oeesystems.com
OEE TOOLKIT
www.oeetoolkit.com
OEE-IMPACTwww.oeeimpact.com
PEMAC
www.pemac.org
PERFORM OEE www.ssw.ie/performoee.asp
RAMS
www.reliability.com.au
RCM Turbo
www.strategic.com
REAL-TPI
www.abb.com
SAP-RLINK
www.osisoft.com
TPM Software
www.tpmsoftware.com
46 / 150
CMM
S
Most MMIS systems can usually:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Track components,
Provide logistic support (e.g., spares inventory),
Store maintenance history,
Alarm predetermined maintenance activities,
Produce management reports.
47 / 150
Tool
Outputs
1- Maintenance labor force.
Excel
48 / 150
49 / 150
5- PM Case Studies
Case (1):
How to construct the coding & criticality systems:
EQUIPMENT CODING
Location
Equipment Type Equipment Tag #
1
2
3
4
7
8
Propose a coding system and priority rules for the following
equipment:
Plant
Equipment Type Number of
Location
Systems
Machines
Productive
Turning
4
Machining
systems
Milling
2
shop
Drilling
2
Grinding
2
Press
1
Induction furnaces
2
Foundry
Molding machines
5
shop
Arc Welding
1
Welding
shop
Supportive
Fork lift
4
Material
systems
handling
Compressor
2
Air room
Pump 50 HP
2
Water
Pump 100 HP
2
room
Diesel generator
2
Power
room
50 / 150
02 Foundry shop
03 Welding shop
04 Material handling
05 Air room
06 Water room
07 Power room
01
Machining shop
06
Water room
Example: 010202
02
#2
52
Pump 100 HP
Example: 065201
01
#1
51 / 150
EQUIPMENT PRIORITY
Failure effect:
- Effect on HSE
- Effect on Production
- Effect on Cost
Failure Probability:
- Failure Frequency
Example:
Factors
1- Production
%
30
2- HSE
30
3- Stand by
15
4- Value
Levels
V- Very Important
I- Important
N- Normal
V- Very Important
I- Important
N- Normal
WO- Without
WS- With Standby
H- High Value
M- Medium
L- Low
52 / 150
Priority
Description
Level
A
Group A: Equipment with 100% duty factor, whose
failure involves production losses and potential safety
hazards.
B
Group B: Equipment with a ratio duty factor, i.e.,
having some standby, whose failure involves
production losses and potential safety hazards.
C
Group C: Equipment with standby, whose failure
involves either production losses or potential safety
hazards.
D
Group D: Equipment with standby, whose failure
involves neither production losses nor safety hazards.
Equipment Priorities
Location
Machining shop
Foundry shop
Welding shop
Material handling
Air room
Water room
Power room
Equipment Type
Turning
Milling
Drilling
Grinding
Press
Induction furnaces
Molding machines
Arc Welding
Fork lift
Compressor
Pump 50 HP
Pump 100 HP
Diesel generator
53 / 150
Priority Level
B
B
B
B
D
A
B
A
C
C
C
C
A
Case (2):
How to select the best maintenance policy?
Number of Engine 2000
Capital maintenance policy for engine is as follows:
Four Policies:
Replacement after first failure (after 36 month)
Repair (010) after first failure & Replacement after
second failure (after 30 month)
Repair (020) after second failure & Replacement after
third failure (after 24 month)
Repair (030) after third failure & Replacement after fourth
failure (after 15 month)
Cost rate:
Replacement $ 10,000&
Repair $ 3,500
Required:
Select the best maintenance policy
Estimate the annual budget for the best policy
Target maintenance plan
54 / 150
Case (3):
The yearly maintenance information for ten gas
generators (GG) in a site are as follows:
1- Working conditions for each GG:
55 / 150
Case (4):
The yearly PM programs information for six similar gas
turbines in a power station are as follows:
1- PM information:
Maintenance levels per gas turbine
Spare
No. of
PM Type Frequency Duration
parts Cost
Workers
$1000
Y Level 1
Yearly
15 days
20
10
S Level 2
6 Monthly 10 days
20
8
3M Level 3 3 Monthly
5 days
15
5
M Level 4
Monthly
2 days
10
2
2- Working conditions:
Gas turbine operating conditions: 24 hour/day
Workers operating conditions: 300 day/year & 8 hour/day
3- CM information:
Average effort of CM = 380 man-day per gas turbine
Average annual spare parts CM = $ 12000 per gas turbine
Average CM downtime = 15 days/year per gas turbine
Average downtime cost rate = $ 1000 per day
4- Cost rates:
Average labor cost rate = $ 10 per man-day
Overhead cost = 25 % direct cost (spare parts & labor)
56 / 150
Required:
1) The size of maintenance labor force.
2) Average system availability.
3) Annual downtime cost losses.
4) Annual maintenance cost.
5) Annual PM plan.
6) Maintenance resource profiles.
7) Monthly PM plans.
8) Maintenance work order
810
810 * 6 = 4860
57 / 150
Annual
Frequency
1
Duration
(day)
15
PM Downtime
(day)
15 * 1= 15
1
2
8
10
5
2
10 * 1 = 10
5 * 2 = 10
2 * 8 = 16
51
58 / 150
Annual
Frequency
1
1
2
8
Cost
$1000
10
8
5
2
Spare parts PM
Cost $1000
10 * 1= 10
8*1=8
5 * 2 = 10
2 * 8 = 16
59 / 150
Month #
6
7
10
11
12
G01
G02
3M
3M
3M
3M
G03
3M
3M
G04
3M
3M
G05
3M
3M
G06
3M
3M
Resource analysis:
Manday
Day/
month
Workers
SP cost
DT
580 230 580 230 580 230 580 230 580 230 580 230
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
26
33
10
18
18
24
26
33
10
18
18
24
26
33
10
18
18
24
26
33
10
18
18
24
26
33
10
18
18
24
26
33
10
18
18
Y= 300 S= 200
Y= 10 S= 8
Y= 15 S= 10
3M= 75
3M= 5
3M= 5
M= 20
M= 2
M= 2
60 / 150
man-day
$1000
day
Month #
10 11 12
G01
G02
3M
3M
3M
3M
G03
3M
3M
G04
3M
3M
G05
3M
3M
G06
3M
3M
Resource analysis:
Manday
Workers
SP cost
DT
455 355 455 355 455 355 355 455 355 455 355 455
19
23
28
15
21
23
19
23
28
15
21
23
Y= 300 S= 200
Y= 10 S= 8
Y= 15 S= 10
19
23
28
15
21
23
3M= 75
3M= 5
3M= 5
15
21
23
19
23
28
M= 20
M= 2
M= 2
61 / 150
15
21
23
19
23
28
man-day
$1000
day
15
21
23
19
23
28
Month #
10 11 12
G01
G02
3M
3M
3M
3M
G03
3M
3M
G04
3M
3M
G05
3M
3M
G06
3M
3M
Resource analysis:
Manday
Workers
SP cost
DT
400 410 400 410 400 410 400 410 400 410 400 410
17
20
25
17
24
26
17
20
25
17
24
26
Y= 300 S= 200
Y= 10 S= 8
Y= 15 S= 10
17
20
25
17
24
26
3M= 75
3M= 5
3M= 5
17
20
25
17
24
26
M= 20
M= 2
M= 2
62 / 150
17
20
25
17
24
26
man-day
$1000
day
17
20
25
17
24
26
G01
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
SB
G02
G03
G04
G05
G06
M
M
SB
M
M
SB
M
M
SB
M
M
SB
M
M
SB
63 / 150
PM worker
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
-
Coding:
64 / 150
Case (5):
The yearly maintenance information for three generators in
a site are as follows:
1- Working conditions:
Two gas generators (GG01 and GG02), one operating
and the other standby
Diesel generator for emergency
Site operating hours 24/day * 365 day
2- PM Levels (Catalog information):
Check oil level every 150 R.H. (about 2 liter)
Change oil every 750 R.H. (about 20 liter)
Change oil filter every 1500 R.H.
Check cooling level every 150 R.H.
Clean/ drain cooling system every 1500 R.H.
Check and clean batteries every 1500 R.H.
Lubricate bearing every 750 R.H. (about 1 liter)
Change bearing every 3000 R.H.
Replace thermostat every 3000 R.H.
3- CM for each GG:
Average oil quantity is 100 liter/year/G.G.
4- Cost rates:
Oil cost 3 $/liter
Filter cost 10 $/unit
Bearing oil cost 5 $/liter
Bearing cost 30 $/each
Thermostat cost 30 $/each
Required:
1. Maintenance work order for each PM level
2. Annual materials requirements Planning & materials cost
3. Annual PM plans
Fundamentals Maintenance Management
Dr. Attia H. Gomaa
65 / 150
66 / 150
Case (6):
Maintenance spare parts cost ($):
Year
1999
Year
2000
Year
2001
Year
2002
Exp.
2003
1450
1300
1200
1000
3
1200
3600
4
1000
4000
X
Y
XY
1
1450
1450
2
1300
2600
n=4
Sum X = 10
Sum Y = 4950
Forecasting
limits
2003
?
5
?
Sum X2 = 30
Sum XY = 11650
Sum Y = n . a + b Sum X ,
4950 = 4 a + 10 b
11650 = 10 a + 30 b
14850 = 12 a + 30 b
a = 1600
b = - 145
Y = 1600 145 X
X
A
F
(A-F)
(A-F)2
2
1300
1310
10
100
3
1200
1165
35
1225
CLs = 0 Z S = 0 48
67 / 150
4
1000
1020
20
400
5
875
Case (7):
Uncertain spare parts cost
Spare parts cost
$ 100,000
9
10
11
12
13
Probability
%
20
50
20
7
3
Solution
68 / 150
T01
D01
M01
T02
M02
T01
8
M01
20
5
5
8
4
7
3
5
6
5
12
69 / 150
W01
W02
W03
1- Activity List
ID
Activity
1
Preparation
2
3
PRP
Mech. maintenance # 01 MM1
Elec. maintenance # 01 EM1
4
5
6
7
8
Mech. maintenance # 02
Elec. maintenance # 02
Mech. maintenance # 03
Elec. maintenance # 03
Setup
MM2
EM2
MM3
EM3
STP
Relations
Duration
Predece (SS, FS, FF,
(day)
ssors
and SF)
2
7
9
PRP
MM1
PRP
MM2
PRP
MM3
EM1
EM2
EM3
6
8
5
7
1
SS 3
SS 2
SS 2
-
2- Resource List
Resource
Code
L01
L02
SPS
Resources description
Unit
Mechanical worker
Electrical worker
Spare parts & supplies
md
md
cost
Limits/day
Norm. Max.
3
6
4
8
-
70 / 150
Price
LE/unit
40
60
1000
3- Resource Allocation
ID
Activity
1
Preparation
PRP
Mech. maintenance # 01 MM1
Elec. maintenance # 01
EM1
Mech. maintenance # 02 MM2
Elec. maintenance # 02
EM2
Mech. maintenance # 03 MM3
Elec. maintenance # 03
EM3
Setup
STP
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
L01/
day
2
4
3
2
2
Resource
L02/
SPS
day
(Total)
1
1
5
4
3
2
3
4
2
3
2
3
1
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
X
1/01/04
Friday
Required:
1. Draw the project network (logic diagram)?
2. Draw the corresponding Gantt chart?
3. Construct the corresponding smoothed worker loading?
4. Construct the corresponding worker leveling?
5. Construct the target action plan?.
6. Construct the cost profile & S-curve?
7. Construct the target master plan?
71 / 150
1- Activity List
ID
Activity
Preparation
Server maintenance
Hardware maintenance
Lab #01
Software maintenance
Lab #01
Hardware maintenance
Lab #02
Software maintenance
Lab #02
Hardware maintenance
Lab #03
Software maintenance
Lab #03
Setup
4
5
6
7
8
9
PRP
SRM
PRP
SRM
HM1
SM1
HM2
SRM
SM2
HM2
SS 1
HM3
SRM
SM3
HM3
SS 1
STP
SM1
SM2
SM3
HM1
SS 2
2- Resource List
Resource
Code
L01
L02
SPS
Resources description
Unit
Hardware Engineer
Software Engineer
Spare parts & supplies
md
md
cost
Limits/day
Norm. Max.
3
6
4
8
-
72 / 150
Price
LE/unit
120
100
1000
3- Resource Allocation
ID
Activity
1
Preparation
2
3
Server maintenance
Hardware maintenance
Lab #01
Software maintenance
Lab #01
Hardware maintenance
Lab #02
Software maintenance
Lab #02
Hardware maintenance
Lab #03
Software maintenance
Lab #03
Setup
4
5
6
7
8
9
PRP
SRM
HM1
L01/
day
2
Resource
L02/
SPS
day
(Total)
1
1
1
4
1
-
1
2
SM1
HM2
SM2
HM3
SM3
STP
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
X
X
X
X 1/01/04
Holidays: 20 to 21 Jan. 2004
Required:
1. Draw the project network (logic diagram)?
2. Draw the corresponding Gantt chart?
3. Construct the corresponding smoothed worker loading?
4. Construct the corresponding worker leveling?
5. Construct the target action plan?.
6. Construct the cost profile & S-curve?
7. Construct the target master plan?
73 / 150
Friday
A
B(2)
D(2)
C(2)
E(2)
E(2)
F(2)
G(1)
Component
Lead time (week)
On-Hand
A
1
10
B
2
15
D(2)
C
1
20
D
1
10
E
2
10
Required:
1. Time-phased for the gear box structure
2. Gross requirements plan for 50 gear box
3. Net material requirements plan for 50 gear box.
74 / 150
F
3
5
G
2
0
Case (12): The monthly plan and the actual maintenance spare
parts in ABC Company are as follows:
Spare
part #
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
75 / 150
Jan.
2004
31
8
24
6
3
120
80
70
10
49
Feb.
2004
28
8
24
4
3
136
105
98
7
67
100
130
76 / 150
Basic data
Item
Jan 04
Production rate (ton/hr)
8
Total time (hr/day)
24
Average down time (hr/day)
6
Average available time (hr)
18
Average standby (hr/day)
3
Average used time (hr/day)
15
Average target quantity
120
(ton/day)
Average actual quantity
80
(ton/day)
Average sound quantity
70
(ton/day)
Average defect quantity
10
(ton/day)
(14%)
Energy productivity (kwh/ton) 700
Material productivity (1000
1429
L.E/ton)
Feb 04
8
24
4
20
3
17
136
Feb. / Jan.
100 %
100 %
67 %
111 %
100 %
113 %
113 %
105
125 %
98
129 %
7
(7%)
684
1326
64 %
77 / 150
98 %
92 %
Performance Evaluation
Indicator January
February
2004
2004
Availability
18/24= 75 % 20/24= 83 %
Feb. /
Jan.
111 %
Performance
efficiency
Quality rate
Utilization ratio
15/18= 83 %
17/20= 85 %
102 %
Uptime (hr/day)
70/8= 8.75
98/8= 12.25
140 %
Uptime ratio
147 %
OEE
44 %
60 %
136 %
TEEP
37 %
51 %
138 %
NEE
29 %
52 %
179 %
Energy
productivity
(kwh/ton)
Material
productivity
(1000 L.E/ton)
700
684
98 %
1429
1326
92 %
78 / 150
Case (14):
The six-monthly maintenance costs ($1000) for a productive
system are as follows:
Target Costs:
Jan
Feb
Month #
Mar Apr May
100
50
100
50
100
50
100
50
100
50
100
50
100
50
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
Feb
Month #
Mar Apr May
Jun
Jly
23
32
38
65
49
96
56
94
68
94
65
90
54
72
231
503
407
213
370
397
181
293
320
185
164
290
199
201
330
196
193
320
157
142
362
Cost item
PM Cost:
Spar parts
Labor
CM Cost:
Spar parts
Labor
DT Cost
Jun
Jly
Actual Costs:
Cost item
PM Cost:
Spar parts
Labor
CM Cost:
Spar parts
Labor
DT Cost
Jan
79 / 150
Target:
Cost item
PM Cost
CM Cost
TM Cost
DT Cost
TM+DT
PM/TM
CM/PM
Jan
150
350
800
300
1100
0.14
2.33
Feb
150
350
800
300
1100
0.14
2.33
Mar
150
350
800
300
1100
0.14
2.33
Month #
Apr May
150 150
350 350
800 800
300 300
1100 1100
0.14 0.14
2.33 2.33
Actual:
Cost item
PM Cost
CM Cost
TM Cost
DT Cost
TM+DT
PM/TM
CM/PM
Month #
Apr May
150 162
349 400
789 892
290 330
1079 1222
0.19 0.18
2.33 2.47
Change %:
Cost item
Jan
Month #
Feb Mar Apr May Jun
PM Cost
CM Cost
TM Cost
DT Cost
TM+DT
PM/TM
CM/PM
80 / 150
Jly
Total
Case (15):
The yearly PM programs information for six similar gas
turbines in a power station are as follows:
PM
18
264
--51
CM
7
72
--15
Total
25
336
75
514
66
PM
20
300
--45
CM
10
100
--5
Total
30
400
80
520
50
81 / 150
Item
Target
Actual
25
336
75
514
925
66
66
30
400
80
520
1000
50
50
991
81.9
7/18 =
38.9
72/264 =
27.3
514/411=
1.25
1050
86.3
10/20 =
50
100/300 =
33.3
520/480=
1.08
+ 6.0
+ 5.3
+ 28.5
25/6=
4.17
30/6=
5.00
- 16.6
TMC + DTC
Availability %
CM/PM % (labor force)
CM/PM % (Spare parts)
Overhead %
Labor productivity %
(worker/gas turbine)
82 / 150
+ 22.0
- 13.6
Case (16):
The six-monthly maintenance costs ($1000) for a productive
system are as follows:
Target Costs:
Cost item
PM Cost:
Spar parts
Labor
CM Cost:
Spar parts
Labor
DT Cost
Jan
Feb
Month #
Mar
Apr May
Jun
Jly
100
50
100
50
100
50
100
50
100
50
100
50
100
50
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
200
150
300
Actual Costs:
Cost item
PM Cost:
Spar parts
Labor
CM Cost:
Spar parts
Labor
DT Cost
Jan
Feb
Month #
Mar
Apr May
Jun
Jly
23
32
38
65
49
96
56
94
68
94
65
90
54
72
231
503
407
213
370
397
181
293
320
185
164
290
199
201
330
196
193
320
157
142
362
83 / 150
Target:
Cost item
Jan
PM Cost
CM Cost
DT Cost
TM Cost
150
350
300
800
Feb
150
350
300
800
Month #
Mar Apr May
150
350
300
800
150
350
300
800
150
350
300
800
Jun
Jly
150
350
300
800
150
350
300
800
Jun
Jly
155
369
320
864
126
299
362
787
Actual:
Cost item
PM Cost
CM Cost
DT Cost
TM Cost
Jan
Feb
55
734
407
1196
103
583
397
1083
Month #
Mar Apr May
145
474
320
939
150
349
290
789
84 / 150
162
400
330
892
Parameters
Vibration Temp.
xxx
xxx
x
xxx
xx
xxx
xx
xxx
x
xx
xx
x
xxx
x
xxx
-
85 / 150
Oil
x
x
xx
x
-
xxx
xx
x
-
86 / 150
Oil
x
x
xx
x
-
87 / 150
88 / 150
89 / 150
90 / 150
Overheating:
Symptoms are discoloration of the rings, balls, and cages
from gold to blue.
Temperature in excess of 400F can anneal the ring and
ball materials.
The resulting loss in hardness reduces the bearing capacity
causing early failure.
In extreme cases, balls and rings will deform. The
temperature rise can also degrade or destroy lubricant.
91 / 150
True Brinelling:
Brinelling occurs when loads exceed the elastic limit of
the ring material.
Brinell marks show as indentations in the raceways which
increase bearing vibration (noise).
Any static overload or severe impact can cause brinelling.
92 / 150
False Brinelling:
False brinelling - elliptical wear marks in an axial
direction at each ball position with a bright finish and
sharp demarcation, often surrounded by a ring of brown
debris indicates excessive external vibration.
Correct by isolating bearings from external vibration, and
using greases containing antiwear additives.
93 / 150
94 / 150
Reverse Loading:
Angular contact bearings are designed to accept an axial
load in one direction only.
When loaded in the opposite direction, the elliptical
contact area on the outer ring is truncated by the low
shoulder on that side of the outer ring.
The result is excessive stress and an increase in
temperature, followed by increased vibration and early
failure.
Corrective action is to simply install the bearing correctly.
95 / 150
Contamination:
Contamination is one of the leading causes of bearing
failure.
Contamination symptoms are denting of the bearing
raceways and balls resulting in high vibration and wear.
Clean work areas, tools, fixtures, and hands help reduce
contamination failures.
Keep grinding operations away from bearing assembly
areas and keep bearings in their original packaging until
you are ready to install them.
96 / 150
Lubricant Failure:
Discolored (blue/brown) ball tracks and balls are
symptoms of lubricant failure. Excessive wear of balls,
ring, and cages will follow, resulting in overheating and
subsequent catastrophic failure.
Ball bearings depend on the continuous presence of a very
thin -millionths of an inch - film of lubricant between
balls and races, and between the cage, bearing rings, and
balls.
Failures are typically caused by restricted lubricant flow
or excessive temperatures that degrade the lubricants
properties.
97 / 150
Corrosion:
Red/brown areas on balls, race-way, cages, or bands of
ball bearings are symptoms of corrosion.
This condition results from exposing bearings to corrosive
fluids or a corrosive atmosphere.
In extreme cases, corrosion can initiate early fatigue
failures.
Correct by diverting corrosive fluids away from bearing
areas and use integrally sealed bearings whenever
possible.
98 / 150
Misalignment:
Misalignment can be detected on the raceway of the
nonrotating ring by a ball wear path that is not parallel to
the raceways edges.
If misalignment exceeds 0.001 in./in you can expect an
abnormal temperature rise in the bearing and/or housing
and heavy wear in the cage ball-pockets.
Appropriate corrective action includes: inspecting shafts
and housings for runout of shoulders and bearing seats;
use of single point-turned or ground threads on non
hardened shafts and ground threads only on hardened
shafts; and using precision grade locknuts.
99 / 150
Loose Fits:
Loose fits can cause relative motion between mating parts.
If the relative motion between mating parts is slight but
continuous, fretting occurs.
Fretting is the generation of fine metal particles which
oxidize, leaving a distinctive brown color. This material is
abrasive and will aggravate the looseness. If the looseness
is enough to allow considerable movement of the inner or
outer ring, the mounting surfaces (bore, outer diameters,
faces) will wear and heat, causing noise and runout
problems.
100 / 150
Tight Fits:
A heavy ball wear path in the bottom of the raceway
around the entire circumference of the inner ring and outer
ring indicates a tight fit.
Where interference fits exceed the radial clearance at
operating temperature, the balls will become excessively
loaded. This will result in a rapid temperature rise
accompanied by high torque.
Continued operation can lead to rapid wear and fatigue.
Corrective action includes a decrease in total interference.
101 / 150
# of
failure
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
102 / 150
Failure Analysis:
Pump Station: 8 Centrifugat pump Code: 1000
Failure Type: Bearing failure
Part code: xxxxx
(Year 2004)
# of
Equipment
Run
Repair
Failure
failure
code
time
time
Mechanism
(hr)
(hr)
1
1007
1250
8
Corrosion
2
1008
1450
6
Corrosion
3
1001
1000
10
Temperature
4
1004
1500
7
Corrosion
5
1006
1000
4
Oil
6
1002
1250
7
Corrosion
7
1003
700
9
Oil
8
1007
600
8
Temperature
9
1008
500
8
Temperature
10
1006
1250
9
Corrosion
11
1001
1000
10
Oil
12
1002
1450
8
Corrosion
13
1005
700
8
Temperature
14
1004
1250
11
Corrosion
15
1005
1000
9
Corrosion
16
1003
700
6
Oil
17
1008
600
9
Temperature
18
1001
1000
8
Oil
Total
18200
145
MTBF = 18200/18 = 1011 hr
MTTR =145 /18 = 8 hr
103 / 150
Frequency
3
4
5
3
3
Mid
point
1525
1275
1025
775
475
C.F.
3
7
12
15
18
C.F.
%
16.67
38.89
66.67
83.33
100
Freq
6
5
4
3
2
1
300
650
650
900
900
1150
MTBF
1150
1400
104 / 150
1400
1650
Equipment Level:
Equipment
code
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
Average
MTBF
(hr)
1000
1000
1000
1000
1250
1450
1350
700
700
700
1500
1250
1325
700
1000
850
1000
1250
1125
1250
600
925
1450
500
600
850
1011
MTTR
(hr)
10
10
8
9.33
7
8
7.5
9
6
7.5
7
11
9
8
9
8.5
4
9
6.5
8
8
8
6
8
9
7.66
8
A
%
Failure
Mechanism
Temperature
Oil
Oil
99.00
Corrosion
Corrosion
99.44
Oil
Oil
98.94
Corrosion
Corrosion
99.33
Temperature
Corrosion
99.01
Oil
Corrosion
99.43
Corrosion
Temperature
99.14
Corrosion
Temperature
Temperature
99.10
99.21
105 / 150
Corrosion
8
Oil
5
Temperature 5
Oil
Temperature
Average
MTBF
(hr)
1500
1450
1450
1250
1250
1250
1250
1000
1000
1000
1000
700
700
MTTR
(hr)
7
8
6
8
7
9
11
9
4
10
8
9
6
1000
700
600
600
500
10
8
8
9
8
1011
Ranges
MTBF
1000 1500
MTTR
6 11
MTBF
700 1000
MTTR
4-10
MTBF
500 1000
MTTR
8-10
99.21
Equipment code
1004
1002
1008
1007
1002
1006
1004
1005
1006
1001
1001
1003
1003
1001
1005
1007
1008
1008
Corrosion
8
Oil
5
Temperature 5
Remedy:
Maintenance Policy
Condition Based
Time Based
Every 300 hours
(1) Change oil every 600 hour
Oil analysis
(2) Change bearing & oil every
Temperature analysis
1200 hour
Vibration analysis
Down time: (1) 1 hr & (2) 8 hr
Fundamentals Maintenance Management
Dr. Attia H. Gomaa
106 / 150
Cost Analysis:
Cost elements:
Spare parts cost = 1000 L.E./failure
PM impact = 2000 L.E./failure
CM impact = 4000 L.E./failure
Parameter
PM frequency (failure/year)
CM frequency (failure/year)
Spare parts cost (1000 L.E. / year)
PM impact (1000 L.E. / year)
CM impact (1000 L.E. / year)
PM & CM impact (1000 L.E. /
year)
Total cost (1000 L.E. / year)
Current
18
18
72
72
Proposed
18
1
19
36
4
40
90
59
Cost ratio %
Cost saving %
100
-
65.5
34.5
107 / 150
Maintenance Policy:
I- Vibration analysis:
1- Frequency: Every 300 Running Hours
2- Tool:
Vibration Equipment: accelerometers, charge amplifier
and analyser.
Computer program for trend analysis and prediction.
3- International Standard: CDA/MS/NVSH107
4- Method:
1. Record the vibration spectrum, specify the peaks
corresponds to the bearing components
2. Record each component peak and frequency.
3. By using the soft ware and the standard limits,
determine the trend of each peak.
4. Determine the bearing state(good need service need
change)
5- Limits: According to CDA/MS/NVSH107
1. Pre-failure: vibration level5.6 m/s
2. Failure: vibration level 5.610 m/s
3. Near catastrophic failure: vibration level >10 m/s
6- Actions:
1. Bearing is Good
2. Call for bearing change
3. Bearing must be changed immediately
108 / 150
109 / 150
110 / 150
5- Limits:
Viscosity: according to ASTMD-445:
1.
2.
3.
6- Actions:
1. Oil is Good
2. Call for oil change
3. Oil must changed immediately
111 / 150
LEVEL II
ADVANCED MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT
7- PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE PLANNING
112 / 150
113 / 150
114 / 150
115 / 150
116 / 150
117 / 150
118 / 150
119 / 150
120 / 150
121 / 150
122 / 150
Viberation Analysis
Vibration analysis is the dominant technique used for
predictive maintenance management. Since the greatest
population of typical plant equipment is mechanical, this
technique has the widest application and benefits in a
total plant program.
This technique uses the noise or vibration created by
mechanical equipment and in some cases by plant
systems to determine their actual condition.
Using vibration analysis to detect machine problems is
not new. During the 1960s and 70s, the US Navy,
petrochemical and nuclear electric power generating
industries invested heavily in the development of
analysis techniques based on noise or vibration that
could be used to detect and identify incipient
mechanical problems in critical machinery.
By the early 1980s, the instrumentation and analytical
skills required for noise-based predictive maintenance
were fully developed.
These techniques and instrumentation had proven to be
extremely reliable and accurate in detecting abnormal
machine behavior. However, the capital cost of
instrumentation and the expertise required to acquire
and analyze noise data precluded general application of
this type of predictive maintenance. As a result, only the
most critical equipment in a few select industries could
justify the expense required to implement a noise-based
predictive maintenance program.
Monitoring the vibration from plant machinery can
provide direct correlation between the mechanical
condition and recorded vibration data of each machine
Fundamentals Maintenance Management
Dr. Attia H. Gomaa
123 / 150
124 / 150
125 / 150
Vibration Sources
M e c h a n ic a l
Lo o se n e s s
S lo t F r e q u e n c y /
E M re la te d
U n b a la n c e
B e n t S h a ft
G e a rs
B la d e P a s s /
F lu id R e la t e d
A lig n m e n t
M o to r
M e c h a n ic a l
Resonances
J o u r n a l ( F lu id F ilm )
B e a rin g s
C o u p lin g s
R o llin g E le m e n t
B e a rin g s
S a m Sh e a rm a n
N a tio n a l In s tru m e n t s
Accelerometer Location
126 / 150
Time Domain
Blade Pass
Motor EM
Force
Rotation
Power Spectrum
127 / 150
Vibration
Monitoring System
Diagram
Transducers
Machine
Acquisition
HW
PCI/PXI/CompactPCI PC
&Measurement
Automation SW
128 / 150
Tool Selection:
Vibrometer
> 2.5
Accelerometer
w/wn
<0.33
The percentage error
<= 0.5 %
w = measured frequency
wn= Natural frequency
The percentage error: % e = 100 (1 MF)
MF = (w/wn) / [ (1 (w/wn)2)2 + (2 z w/wn)2 ]0.5
z = damping ratio
Case (20):
A vibrometer of 10 Hz natural frequency and 0.68 damping
ratio is used to measure the vibration of a machine with
frequency 15 Hz.
1- Is this a successful selection for the measuring
transducer? Why?
2- What is the percentage error in the measured vibration?
w/wn = 15 / 10 = 1.5
So, it is not a successful selection.
The percentage error: % e = 100 (1 MF)
MF = (w/wn) / [ (1 (w/wn)2)2 + (2 z w/wn)2 ]0.5
w/wn = 1.5
z = damping ratio = 0.68
MF = 0.94
%e = 100 (1 0.94) = 6 %
129 / 150
130 / 150
Class II
20-100
A
Class III
>100 HP
Class IV
>100 HP
A
(Good)
B
B
B
C
C
11.2
18.0
28.0
45.0
71.0
A: Good B: Allowable
C: Tolerable
B
(Allowable)
C
(Tolerable)
D
(Not
Permissable)
D: Not Permissible
Suggested Classifications:
Class I: Small (up to 15kW) machines and subassemblies of larger machines.
Class II: Medium size (15kW to 75kW) machines without special
foundations, or machines up to 300kW rigidly mounted on special
foundations.
Class III: Large rotating machines rigidly mounted on foundations which
are stiff in the direction of vibration measurement.
Class IV: Large rotating machines mounted on foundations which are
flexible in the direction of vibration measurement.
131 / 150
Comments
ISO 2372 is still valid for power below 15 kW. The "new" standard is
called ISO 10816 and has several parts. The part /1 outlines the basics
and the connection to older and newer standards. Part /3 is the essential
part for all general production machinery such as fans, pumps etc. In
general, as compared to older levels back to Rathbone or VDI 2056 /
Iso 2372, the levels are reduced from what was the red limit before
down to approx. half and the lowest levels called just "A" are a slight
bit higher but have aquired firm statements like "Delivery status",
much stronger recommendation than just an "A". Reciprocating /
piston och screw volume machines had Class 5 in ISO 2372 but these
levels are lost in 10816 with a very soft talk about asking the user to
please report back to ISO about experiences. That has cause this part to
be useless and old 2372 Class 5 for such machinery is used a lot here.
Meaning in clear text that 4.5 mm/s rms is delivery "green" level unless
technically motivated to be something else. Frequency range is now
expanded to cover those frequencies that are relevant, instead of the
10-1000 Hz that was used in 2372. Unit is still mm/s rms (rms is true
rms, not just an average using a diode and a capacitor in the
instrument). Regards Arne
132 / 150
New machine
Worn machine
Long life Short life Call for Immediate
> 1000 hr <= 1000 hr service
repair
1.4
0.79
5.6
3.2
10
5.6
18
10
1.0
0.56
0.32
1.0
10
5.6
3.2
3.2
18
18
10
5.6
32
32
18
10
1.0
0.56
1.4
1.4
3.2
3.2
10
10
5.6
5.6
18
18
10
10
32
32
10
4.5
1.4
0.56
32
10
5.6
5.6
32
10
10
10
56
18
18
18
133 / 150
New machine
Worn machine
Long life Short life Call for Immediate
> 1000 hr <= 1000 hr service
repair
7.9
2.5
0.79
18
5.6
3.2
18
10
5.6
32
18
10
1.8
1.0
0.56
1.0
18
5.6
3.2
3.2
18
18
10
5.6
32
32
18
10
0.25
1.8
3.2
5.6
0.14
1.8
3.2
5.6
0.14
0.10
0.56
0.32
1.0
0.56
134 / 150
Frequency of Dominant
Vibration (Hz=rpm/60)
1 * rpm
(1 to 2) * rpm
Impact rates for the individual
bearing component. *
Vibration at high frequencies
(2 to 60 kHz)
(1/2 to 1/3) rpm
Journal bearings
loose in housing
Oil film whirl or
Slightly less than half shaft
Whip in Journal bearings speed (42 to 48%)
Mechanical looseness
2 * rpm
*Impact rates f(Hz):
n = number of balls,
Bd = ball diameter mm,
Pd = Pitch circle diameter mm, = Angle
1- The frequency of vibration due to outer race defect:
f = (n/2) (rpm/60) (1 (Bd/Pd) cos
2- For inner race defect
f = (n/2) (rpm/60) (1 + (Bd/Pd) cos
3- For ball defect
f = (Bd/Pd) (rpm/60) (1 ((Bd/Pd) cos )2)
135 / 150
t = 1984 hr.
136 / 150
Case (22):
During a predictive maintenance program of a 2000 RPM air blowing
unit, the following vibration levels was obtained, the stud fixed
vibrometer used has 0.7 damping ratio and 10 HZ natural frequency.
Hours 100
mm/s 058
200
1.08
300
1.58
400
2.08
500
2.58
600
3.08
700
3.58
800
4.08
900
4.58
Required:
1. Find the percentage error in the measured vibration if the high
level corresponds to 25 HZ.
2. Construct the vibration trending and predict the vibration level
after 110 hours.
3. Does the above results changed if the vibrometer fixed by a waxy
material, why?
4. Using the Canadian specification CDA/MS/NVSH107, predict
the time to call for service and to immediate repair starting
from the last measurement (at t1)
Solution:
1- percentage error in the measured vibration level
measured frequency w = 25 [Hz])
Vibrometer natural frequency wn = 10 [Hz]
Z= damping factor =0.7
w/wn= 25/10= 2.5
MF= (w/wn)^2/{[(1- (w/wn)^2)^2]+(2z w/wn)^2}0.5
MF=0.99
Percentage error (e%) =100(1-MF)=0.9%
137 / 150
a ti +bn= vi
ti^2=2850000
a*4500+9b=23.22
b=0.08
v=0.08+0.005t [mm/s]
Prediction of the vibration level after 110 hours
v=.08+.005*110=0.63 mm/s
2- if the vibrometer fixed by a waxy material instead of stud
fixing:
the value of vibrometer natural frequency wn k/m, for wax k
become smaller so the value w/wn become larger . i.e. the value w/wn
become more bigger i.e. this fixation will improve the measured
values (become more accurate) .
3- from the Canadian specification CAD/MS/NVSH107 at 2000
rpm
the permissible vibration level to call for service =5.6 [mm/s]
the permissible vibration level to call for immediate repair =10 [mm/s]
The time to call for service :
0.08+0.005t=5.6 t=1104 hours
The time to call for immediate reaper :
0.08+0.005t=10 t=1984 hours
138 / 150
Case (23):
The following Figure shows the line diagram of a pumping
system.
Motor
rev/min 1800
Coupling
Gearbox
Ratio 1:10
Gear 1
B1
B2
Gear 2
Pump
B3
B4
139 / 150
N2=?
Z1/Z2 = 10/1
Speed ratio = N1 / N2 = Z1 / Z2
1800/N2 = 10 / 1
140 / 150
141 / 150
142 / 150
143 / 150
144 / 150
145 / 150
146 / 150
147 / 150
148 / 150
149 / 150
150 / 150
RBI has been used in the nuclear power generation industry for
some time and is also employed in refineries and petrochemical
plant.
RBI has been applied in industries such as power generation,
refineries, petrochemical plants and pipelines.
RBI Targets
The ultimate goals of RBI are:
To develop a cost-effective inspection and maintenance program
that provides assurance of acceptable mechanical integrity and
reliability.
To improve plant HSE (Health, Safety and Environment)
To improve plant reliability, availability and maintainability (RAM)
To reduce maintenance down time cost
151 / 150
10Reliability
(RCM)
Centered
Maintenance
152 / 150
2- Safety-critical components:
SM tasks must be performed only when such tasks will
prevent a decrease in reliability and/or deterioration of
safety to unacceptable levels or when the tasks will reduce
the life-cycle cost of ownership.
153 / 150
RCM Steps:
1. System selection and information analysis.
2. System boundary definition.
3. System description and functional block diagram.
4. System function and functional failures.
5. Failure mode and effects analysis.
6. Logic (decision) tree analysis.
7. Task selection.
RCM Implementation Steps
1. RCM Feasibility Study
2. RCM Team Building & Training
3. RCM Master Plan (1-3 years)
4. Design of Maintenance Performance Evaluation System
5. Design of Maintenance Criticality System
6. System Selection & Information Analysis
7. System Description & Process Analysis
8. Equipment Classification (critical & non-critical)
9. Maintenance Information Analysis
10. Failure Mode & Effect Analysis (FMEA)
11. Risk Analysis
12. Logic (Decision) Tree Analysis
13. Task Selection and Job Plan
14. Maintenance Program & Planning
15. Implementation
16. RCM Performance Evaluation
17. Corrective Actions
154 / 150
Failure Failure
mode Cause
Failure Effects
Local
System
Unit
Failure Modes: the manner in which a fault occur, the way in which
the element fail.
Failure Effects: what would happen if the failure mode occurs
(efficiency, cost and time).
155 / 150
156 / 150
and doing this at minimum cost to the facility providing the least risk
of breakdown [ODonoghue and Prendergast, 2004].
TPM provides a comprehensive company-wide approach to
maintenance management, which can be divided into long-term and
short-term activities. In the long-term, efforts focus on new equipment
design and elimination of sources of lost equipment time and typically
require the involvement of many areas of the organization. In the shortterm, attention is focused on an autonomous maintenance program for
the production department, a planned maintenance program for the
maintenance department, and skill development for operations and
maintenance personnel. Most of the previous studies focused on the
short-term maintenance efforts [McKone et al., 1999 and 2001].
The TPM bundle includes practices primarily designed to maximize
equipment effectiveness through planned preventive-predictive
maintenance of the equipment and using maintenance optimization
techniques. More generally, emphasis on maintenance may also be
reflected by the emphasis given to new process equipment or
technology acquisition [Cua et al., 2001].
The impact of TPM on improving productivity has been stated in many
studies, and there is a lot of excellent case studies, for example; a semiautomated assembly cell [Chand and Shirvani, 2000]; large Global
companies [Ireland and Dale, 2001]; pulp and paper [Van-der-Wal and
Lynn, 2002]; Ceramics [Ferrari et al., 2002]; and electronics [Chan et
al., 2003].
Refer to Gomaa, 2005, TPM benefits may be concluded as follows: (1)
Improvement in OEE (25 to 50%); (2) Improvement in labor
productivity (30 to 40%); (3) Reduction in product defects (25 to
30%); (4) Reduction in maintenance cost (10 to 30%); (5) Reduction in
unplanned maintenance (20 to 50%); (6) Reduction in manufacturing
cost (5 to 15%); and hence; (7) Improvement in total system
productivity (20 to 30%); (8) Promotion of team approach; (9) Improve
operator satisfaction; (10) Empowerment of manpower; and hence (11)
Reduce the communication problem.
157 / 150
158 / 150
159 / 150
System
configuration
Maintenance
planning &
control
Production
planning &
control
Product/service
quality control
Spare parts
planning &
control
. Max
OEE
TPM Master
plan
Operational management
)departments & workshops(
160 / 150
Main References:
1. Jones, R.B. Risk-Based Management , Gulf Publishing
Company, Houston, 1995.
2. Moubray, Jhon. Reliability Centered Maintenance II ,
Industrial Press Inc. New York, 1991.
3. Parra, Carlos, Course of Reliability- Centered
Maintenance, Universidad de los Andes, Mrida Venezuela, 1998.
4. Smith, Anthony. Reliability Centered Maintenance ,
McGraw Hill Inc., New York, 1992.
161 / 150