RCM-2009 BrochureInsideMove Forward with Dynamic Performance MeasuresUPTIME MAGAZINEDECEMBER/JANUARY 2009Using the Right Performance MeasuresFind Your Eccentric MotorsDriven Nuts by Squirrel Stores The Neverending Vibration Problemthe magazine for maintenance & reliability professionalsdec/jan 09Dec_Jan Cover.indd 1 12/19/08 10:59:10 AMUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 2 11/13/08 10:41:12 PMWeb: books.mro-zone.comToll Free: 1-888-575-1245Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 3 11/13/08 10:54:48 PMUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 4 11/13/08 10:54:52 PMUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 5 11/13/08 10:55:05 PMUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 6 11/13/08 10:55:16 PM84844uptimecontentsupfrontupclosebreakthrough performance using dynamic kpis6824upload1824283438444852 566234upgradefind the mvp for your plant56www.uptimemagazine.cominformation technologygoing 3d on your pmsinfraredthe lasting value of windowslubricationexercise your rightsmaintenance managementthe right measuring stickmotor testingexploring eccentricity in the air gapprecision maintenancedont get squirrelly with partsreliability(re)searching for pump mtbfultrasoundtwo is better than onevibrationstumped...the problem that wouldnt end 38521828Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 7 11/15/08 9:33:39 PMWe do a lot of measuring in maintenance and reliability.Not only do we measure the physical properties of equipment, the environment in which the equipment operates and the processes that equipment provides, we also measure the management of all this equipment and process (KPIs).In fact, in his Maintenance Management article explaining the need for metrics standardization, author Walter Nijsen points out in that the Society of Maintenance and Reliability Professionals has targeted nearly 100 KPIs that will eventually be published for companies to use as they see fit.In this maelstrom of measurement, it is quite easy to get caught up in the numbers for which our individual unit is responsible.Or, to paraphrase our feature article author, Dr. Peter Martin, it is easy to become trapped in our own organizational silo.We concentrate so fully on what our unit is responsible for producing that we can lose sight of the only goal that really matters, the overall performance of our organization.As Dr. Martin points out, it is critical to take a step back from all the measuring that we do, and simply make sure we are using the right yardstick.It is of paramount importance that whatever we measure, we make sure those measurements are pointing us all in the same direction - that everyone in the organization has the same over arching goal.According to Martin, where many organizations fall short is in defining which measurements are used to grade performance.If different units (operations and maintenance, for example) in an organization are measured upon goals that are actually in conflict, that makes it quite difficult to form a cohesive team.It is a fascinating article, and one that I hope will provide an impetus for us to examine the yardsticks we use to measure ourselves.Also, please take a look at the information in this issue about the Reliability Centered Maintenance/Enterprise Asset Management Conference, RCM/EAM-2009, in Daytona Beach, FL, which is taking place March 23th-26th.This event will also include M-Train, which focuses on helping you build the most effective maintenance and reliability training program for your company.It is an outstanding opportunity to hone your skills and improve your professional understanding.These days, I know full well that many training and education budgets are very tight and under scrutiny, but this event will be well worth the time and money invested.I hope you enjoy this issue.As always, thank you for reading.We appreciate your support, and hope you find value within these pages.If you have any questions, comments or suggestions that will make Uptime more useful to you, please let us know.upfrontThe Right Yardstick uptimePUBLISHERTerrence OHanlonEDITOR IN CHIEFJeffrey C ShulerEDITORIAL ADVISORS/CONTRIBUTING EDITORSADVERTISING SALESBill Partipilo888-575-1245 x 114sales@uptimemagazine.comEDITORIAL INFORMATIONPlease address submissions of casestudies, procedures, practical tipsand other correspondence to Jeff Shuler, Editor In ChiefUptime MagazinePO Box 60075Ft. Myers, FL 33906888-575-1245 x 116jshuler@uptimemagazine.comSUBSCRIPTIONSto subscribe to Uptime, log onwww.uptimemagazine.comUptime(ISSN1557-0193)ispublishedmonthly by Reliabilityweb.com, PO Box 60075, Ft. Myers, FL 33906, 888-575-1245.In the U.S. Uptime is a registered trademark of Reliabilityweb.com.No partofUptimemaybereproducedinanyform by any means without prior written consent from Reliabilityweb.com.Uptimeisanindependentlyproduced publicationofReliabilityweb.com.Theopinions expressedhereinarenotnecessarilythoseof Reliabilityweb.com.Copyright2008byReliabilityweb.com.All rights reserved.volume 4, issue 32Ron EshlemanGreg StocktonRay ThibaultJack Nicholas, Jr.Dr. Howard PenroseJames HallAlan JohnstonJay Lee, PhDJohn MitchellJason Tranterdecember/january 20096POSTMASTER:Sendaddresschangesto: UptimeMagazinePOBox60075,Ft.Myers, FL 33906.All the best,Jeff ShulerEditor In Chiefjshuler@uptimemagazine.comAMPthe association for maintenance professionalsUptime Magazine is a founding member ofUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 8 11/17/08 10:32:28 AMCopyright 2008, IOtech. All trademarks are property of their respective holders. For a complete listing of IOtech worldwide sales offices, see www.iotech.com/sales. 081003. UT.T H E L E A D E R I N D A T A A C Q U I S I T I O N S O L U T I O N STake control of your Predictive Maintenance.iotech.com/eZtomas(888)890-1322sales@iotech.comRemote interface software for rotating machine monitoring & analysisNEW eZ-TOMAS Remote Rotating machine analysisand monitoring from anywhere on your network Up to 32 TOMAS installations can be monitored simultaneously Multiple remote locations may monitor a single acquisition systemContact us today!Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 9 11/13/08 10:57:46 PMby Dr. Peter G. MartinOut of Many...december/january 2009Pointing the Whole Organization in the Same Direction8OneUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 10 11/15/08 9:41:21 PM9www.uptimemagazine.comlthoughhugequantitiesoftechnologyandintellectual property have been invested into the efficient and ef-fectiveoperationofindustrialplantsoverthepast century, many plants are still not operating to full po-tential. At least part of the reason for this has been the lack of focus on the value that the human assets can generate given a supportive, collaborativeandempoweringenvironmentinwhichtoperform. Mobilizingthevaluablehumanassetstoapproachtheirfullper-formance potential has been proven to result in a new operational paradigmwhichmaximizesthebusinessperformancethroughall plant assets.This new paradigm is labeled asset performance man-agement.Dealing with LaborA considerable contributing factor in the engine that can drive toward effective asset performance management is a fundamental change in mindset and culture that is a holdover from the industrial revolution. Changing such a mindset requires that we first understand what it is and where it originated.As industrialization started to ramp up in North America and Western Europe, one resource that was abundant was people to work the plants and factories.Unfortu-nately, the vast majority of the available human resources were uneducated and unskilled.From the perspective of todays cultureitmaybehard to re-latetohowuneducatedthesepeoplereallywere.Mostcouldnot read, write or do even basic arithmetic.This led to a huge industrial challenge how to take advantage of such a resource.This challenge was met by Frederick Taylor, who developed an approach called Sci-entific Management, which focused on gaining maximum value from an uneducated workforce.In todays vernacular, Scientific Manage-ment essentially turned people into minimally functional robots, each performingawellcontainedandwelldefinedfunctionwithinthe context of the operation of the entire plant or factory.For example, apersonmayhavebeentrainedtowatchagaugeandkeepitina certain range.When the needle moved out of the range, the worker would turn a hand valve in one direction.When the needle moved out of range in the other direction, he turned the valve in the other direction.This person might join the workforce of the factory at 16 years old and retire 50 years later having performed that contained task his entire career.This led to the concept of a labor force in in-dustrial companies which was so unskilled that management believed it could not be trusted to perform duties beyond menial tasks.In es-sence, the laborers were almost treated as a kind of industrial slave.Thisviewofthelaborforcewasexacerbatedwiththeintroduction ofautomationtechnologies.Inmanycases,theautomationtech-nologiesweredevelopedtoperformthesamefunctionslaborers had performed.For example, automatic controllers providing direct manipulation of control valves essentially were replacing the laborer whohadpreviouslybeenstationedatthatvalve.Earlyautomation advancementsmayhaveallowedasinglelaborertoperformthe scope of functionality that six or eight laborers had previously been doing.As computer-based automation systems were in-troduced,single operators may have been able to over-see functionality thatAUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 11 11/16/08 1:17:36 PMdecember/january 2009information technologies, organizational silos haveworkedtodestroyanypotentialvalue that may have been created by the technolo-gy.I was recently attending an industrial con-ferenceinwhichanengineerestimatedthat over 80% of all advanced control that has been implementedinindustrialplantshasbeen turnedoffbytheprocessoperatorsbecause theoperatorsdonttrustit.Ifengineering and operations had a better working relation-ship, based on common goals and objectives, thismightnotbethecase.Organizational siloshavetendedtosub-optimizeplantper-formancebysub-optimizingthehumanper-formance within the plants.Perhaps it is time forindustrytostartmovingawayfromlong over-wornprejudicesandconsiderusingthe valuable human resources more effectively to drive better plant performance.Measuring PerformanceYouareprobablyfamiliarwiththecommon adage is: people perform to their measures. Ibelievethatthisisverytrue.Mostpeople wanttobeevaluatedpositively,andifthey knowthatmeasuresofperformanceexist for which they will be held accountable, they willstrivetomakethosemeasuresmovein thecorrectdirection.Thisistruewhether the measures are driving desired behaviors or not.For example, measuring maintenance on asset availability and operations on asset uti-lizationdoesnotencouragethecooperative behaviorsmostindustrialleaderswouldlike to see.In the early periods of industrialization, prior to the many inventions that drove the indus-trial revolution, most shops measured perfor-manceaseachproductwasproduced.Pro-ductionwassoslowthataccountingforthe business on the basis of piecemeal production was easily achieved.Management and opera-torsofthesefirmsknewexactlyhowthey wereperformingcomparedtotheirplanat all times.But with the introduction of tools, suchasthepowerloominthetextileindus-try,thepaceofproductionincreasedtothe pointthatpiecemealaccountingwasnolon-ger feasible.The result was that industrial op-erationscompromisedandbeganmeasuring thebusinessperformancethroughmonthly accountingmethods.Theprimaryoutputof thesesystemsformeasuringmanufacturing performance was, and in most cases today still is, the variance report.Variance reports basi-cally report the cost per unit product made for eachproductproducedoverthepastmonth and displays this against a previously predict-ed expected value, referred to as the standard 10viewed as the unskilled, uneducated laborers of the early industrial revolution. Organizational SilosHavingworkedwithindustrialorganizations for over three decades, I have frequently heard therejoinderthatislandsofautomation aretoblameforthedifficultiesindevelop-inghigherperformingoperations.Although thereiscertainlymuchtruthtothis,Ihave found that islands of organization within in-dustrial companies present a much more for-midable barrier to performance improvement. Asindustrializationtookholdandgrew,the complexitiesintroducedtomanufacturing businesses became very challenging.In early industrial plants the same person might oper-ateandmaintaintheequipment,designand commissionnewproductionareasandeven accountforthebusiness.Asmorecomplex manufacturing systems have evolved, this lev-el of generalization is just not feasible, which has led to the era of specialization. Professionalsspecializedinengineering,ac-counting,management,purchasingofmate-rialsandshippingoffinishedproductswhile frontlinelaborspecializedinoperationsand maintenance of the equipment.This naturally resulted in separation of departments by func-tion which, in turn, led to organizational silos. The development of specialists was necessary totheoperationoftheincreasinglycomplex plants, but the development of organizational silos resulted in huge inefficiencies across or-ganizations.Todayitisnotunusualtofind maintenance departments that never directly communicatewithoperationsorproduction teams.In some organizations they dont even like or trust each other.Adding to this, many IT organizations dontlike or trust engineer-ing, and the feelings are mutual.And nobody seems to get along well with accounting.Inmanycases,theperformancemeasures usedtoevaluatetheperformanceofone group are in direct conflict with those of a sec-ond group.For example, maintenance teams are often measured on the availability of criti-cal equipment assets while operators are mea-suredontheutilizationoftheassets.Asset availabilityandassetutilizationareinverse functions.Thatis,toincreaseutilizationof-ten requires the sacrifice of some availability andviceversa.Underthisscenario,itisno wonderoperationsandmaintenanceteams seldom get along well.As industry has invested huge amounts of cap-ital into efficiency-increasing automation and wouldhaverequiredfiftypeopleinthepast. Thebasicvaluepropositionfortheintroduc-tionofautomationtechnologywastypically basedonheadcountreductionsthatcouldbe achieved.Manymanufacturesseemtohave viewed these reductions as a double benefit to the company.First was the cost reduction for not having to pay the displaced laborers.But secondwasthethoughtthattherewouldbe less of the low-level laborers to have to manage and worry about. Theculminationofthetechnologyreplacing peopletrendtookplaceinthe1980swhen anumberofmanagementscientistsanden-gineerssupportedanotionreferredtoas lights-out manufacturing.The thought pro-cessbehindthistrendwasthattechnology mayhaveadvancedtothepointatwhichno frontlineworkerswouldberequiredatall, and without people in the plants there would benoneedtoturnonthelights.Thiswas ashort-livedmovementduetothefactthat the technologists found they could not antici-pate every possible issue or problem that may arise in a plant and that at least some number of people must be in the plant, if for nothing else, at least contingency responses.All of this has left a residual mindset in both industrialmanagementandengineeringthat frontlinepersonnelareanecessaryevilthat wouldbeeliminatedifpossible.Thishas further led to an attitude prevalent across in-dustry that the actions and activities of these frontline laborers have to be contained to only those essential to keep the plant operating.A goodexampleofthismindsetcanbefound in the design approach taken to the software inindustrialworkstations.Thissoftwareis designedaroundtheconceptofoperation by exception, which basically means that the processoperatorisnotsupposedtodoany-thingiftheprocessisoperatinginareason-able manner (except, perhaps read the sports page).When something unexpected happens, analarmwillcausetheoperatortofollowa predefinedprocedurethatshouldbringthe alarm condition under control.Once the alarm conditionhasbeenaddressed,theoperator goesbacktothenewspaper.Additionally, engineershavedevelopedanddeployedad-vance control and other advanced techniques designed to operate the plant better than the operators could by themselves.The attitude ofprotectingtheplantfromthefrontlinela-borers has continued, even while the average education and skill level of the labor force has beensteadilyrising.Ihavebeenincontrol roomsinwhichthefrontlineprocessopera-tors all had college educations, and were still Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 12 11/14/08 6:59:44 PM11www.uptimemagazine.commonthlymeasures,frontlinepersonneloften finddailymeasurestoolongatimeframeto offeractionablefeedback.Asingleoperator maymakehundredsofspecificactionseach day,andanoveralldailymeasuredoesnot provide the timeliness for them to understand theperformanceimpactofanyspecificac-tion. Tomakemattersworse,KPIstendtohave littlecredibilitywithaccountants,whosejob itistomeasurethebusinessperformance. AlthoughmanyKPIsmayreportinmonetary terms, accountants often have great difficulty reconcilingthevaluesreportedthoughthe KPIs with the values in the accounting reports. Whenthishappens,theaccountinginforma-tion clearly takes precedent.I actually heard one CFO say, If one more engineer comes to mewithonemoreKPItellingmehowmuch value he has created, Ill fire his $&*! OneotherdeficiencywithKPIsisthatthey have evolved to support management report-ing rather than actionable feedback.Report-ing measures are used to report performance tomanagers,whileactionablemeasuresare usedtoprovideguidancetopeoplesothey cantakebetteractionsthroughbetterdeci-sionmaking.Bothreportingmeasuresand actionablemeasuresareimportanttoplant operation.However, the actionable measures have been found to drive positive changes in behavior,whichresultsinperformanceim-provements,whichwill,inturn,improvethe reporting measures.Dynamic Performance MeasuresThevalueofaneffectiveandcomprehensive performancemeasurementsystemcannot beoverstatedwhenitsworkingtodrivein-creasedlevelsofperformancefromplantas-sets.Industryhasreachedthepointwhere theperformancemeasuresthatencourage theorganizationalsilomentalityhavetobe abandoned in favor of measures that drive col-laborationbetweentraditionallycompeting functions.Anewapproachtoperformance measurementisrequiredthatcombinesthe goodness of accounting and operational mea-sures, provides performance measures for ev-erypersonintheoperation,withinthetime frameinwhichtheydotheirjobandforthe same domain for which they are responsible. Such performance measures are referred to as dynamicperformancemeasures(DPMs,See Figure 1, next page).The first issue that has to be addressed in de-veloping a DPM approach is the availability of costfortheproductclass.Thisinformation maybeacceptableforreportingmanufac-turingperformance,butithaslittlevaluein enablingtheplantpersonneltochangetheir behaviors to improve the performance of the operation.Theinformationinthevariance reportsisbothtoolittle(providingabroad plant-wideperspective)andtoolate(after themonthisover)tobeofanyvaluetothe peopleactuallyworkingtokeeptheplants operating.Monthlyaccountingsystemsforreportingof manufacturing and business performance rep-resentedacompromiseintroducedtoindus-tryoutofnecessity.Thetoolsjustdidnot existtomeasureplantperformanceasthe plant was running.Over many years, industry got lulled into believing that monthly financial reporting was a best practice that should nev-erbechallenged.Accountingprofessionals earned Masters Degrees on how to do month-ly accounting.Once degrees are conferred on how to do any practice, it is very challenging toeverquestionthevalidityofthepractice again.Therefore,whendigitalcomputers were generally introduced into industrial op-erations during the 1960s and 1970s, nobody seemedtoraisethequestionastowhether accountingandperformancemeasurement systems might be able to be developed to ac-countforoperationsasoriginallyintended as the products are made - in real time.Sincemonthlyaccountingmeasuresfromin costaccountingsystemsprovedtobefairly useless in directing the actions of the opera-tionsandmaintenanceteams,anumberof leading industrial companies started to devel-opadifferentsetofoperationsperformance measurementstosupplementtheaccount-ingsystemsbyprovidingmoreactionable feedbacktoplantpersonnel.Themeasures produced by these systems are commonly re-ferred to as key performance indicators (KPIs). These KPIs were not developed to replace the accounting measures, rather they were devel-oped because engineers and managers did not viewthemeasuresproducedintheaccount-ing systems as adequate for directing perfor-manceandimprovingactionsintheplant. KPIs were typically developed to measure dif-ferent operational silos within plants, such as maintenance, operations and engineering.By focusingonspecificfunctions,theytendto offer better resolution, as well as better time-liness,thanaccountingmeasures.However, by being functionally focused, they also tend to discourage cooperation between organiza-tionalgroups.Eventhoughdailymeasures provided a great leap forward from traditional Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 13 11/14/08 6:59:46 PMCIOs. CTOs. CHIEF ENGINEERS. O&M, CAPITAL ASSET AND PROJECT MANAGERSDiscover the Most Innovative Ideas, Practices and Technologies at the Worlds Leading Plant Asset Lifecycle Management Event.15TH ANNUALA must-attend forum for users and sellers of 3D imaging technologyNew for 2009! PLANT ASSET SCANNING SUMMITImage courtesy of COADE, Inc.February 23-25, 2009 Hilton AmericasHOUSTON, TX NEW, LARGER downtown venue in the heart of the Global Energy IndustryDont miss our biggest conference program ever for O/Os and EPCs in: Chemicals/Petrochemicals Oil & Gas Energy/Power ShipbuildingSPONSORSEXHIBITORSSynergisSoftwareAceCadSOFTWAREREGISTER by December 31stto get the best rates at www.daratechplant.com or call Jill Dean at 832-242-1969, ext. 316Sponsoring Organization:Organized by:3DS ArTrA CAD Schroer CAXperts GmbH CSA ECE Design GSN Technologies PlP Total CAD Systems vR Context Z+F UK LTDUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 14 11/13/08 10:58:40 PM13www.uptimemagazine.comoperation.This information can then be presented on a performance dash-board contextualized to each persons responsibility.These are the DPMs of the frontline operators.Developing these DPMs requires a real timecomputerenginethathasbuilt-in modeling capability. This is exactly whatastandardautomationsystem is.TheseDPMsmustthenbeaggran-dizedtoprovideperformancemea-sures in real time for every other func-tionwithintheplant.Thiscaneasily beaccomplishedbyusingastandard processhistorianwhichcanalsode-velophourly,shift,daily,weeklyand monthlyaccumulationsoftheDPMs. Theavailabilityofacomprehensive, real time, bottom to top performance measurement system provides the po-tential to drive improved performance inanumberofwayspreviouslyun-available to industrial operations. The basicvalueimprovementthatcanbe realized through better individual per-formance of frontline personnel, who can immediately see how their actions impact plantperformance,hasbeenproventopro-videhugeperformancegains.However,this is only a starting point.A New Perspective on Asset Performance ManagementThe availability of DPMs enables asset perfor-mancemanagementinwayspreviouslyun-available.Aspreviouslymentioned, traditionalassetmanagementin-volves operators driving the assets to maximizeassetutilizationandmain-tenancemaintainingtheassetsto drivemaximumassetavailability.It isimportanttounderstandthatnei-therassetavailability,norassetutili-zation,isameasureofthebusiness objectivesofanyplant.Sincethey areinversefunctions,operatorsand maintenanceteamsarefrequentlyat odds with each other.So, in essence, traditional performance measurement systemstendtodiscouragecoopera-tion and collaboration. Itsquiteusefultouseananalogy from the world of sports since nearly allprofessionalsportsareperfor-mance-driven.Inautomobileracing, thedriverisanalogoustotheopera-torsinindustrialplantsandthepit crewsareanalogoustothemainte-a database that provides real time input data.Fortunately, in most industrial plants, such a database is readily available intheformofplantsensors. Plantsensorscontinually measurephysicalandchemi-calproperties,suchasflow, level,temperature,pressure, speedandcompositionof process variables in real time. Theyaretypicallyaccessible bytheinstalledautomation systems and are used to mon-itorandcontroltheprocess. Sincebothaccountingand operationalmeasurescan bedefinedviaequations,an experienced engineer can de-velop models of the equations in the automation system and determine which sensors can be used to populate the mod-elsneededtocalculatethe DPMs.The net result is a set ofperformancemeasuresfor each process unit or work cell in the plant. In most plants there are simply too many mea-sures for any one frontline person to deal with in real time.When working in real time envi-ronments,suchasdrivingacaroroperating aplant,ergonomicresearchhasdetermined that most people can only consider up to four competing measures at a time.The question is which four measures are most appropriate foreachpersonintheoperation.Thiscan bedeterminedbytaking thecurrentmanufacturing strategyintoconsideration. Dr.ThomasVollmannde-velopedastrategyanalysis approachthatcanbevery helpfulindeterminingthe DPMs for each person in the operation.TheVollmann Triangle diagram (See Figure 2)ishelpfulinunderstand-inghisapproach.Hepoints outthateveryplantshould beworkingtoastrategy designedtomaximizethe economic value of the plant outputwithintheexternal and internal environment in which the plant is operating. Each manufacturing strategy should be defined by a set of actionablestrategicobjec-tives for the plant.An action plan,inwhicheachaction stepismeasurable,shouldbedevelopedfor each objective.The measures that fall out of the action steps are the strategic performance measures of the plant.These measures can be decomposed through the physical areas, units andmajorassetsoftheplanttodetermine themostimportantmeasuresforeachpro-cessunitaccordingtothecurrentstrategy. Thiscanthenbeusedtoprioritizethereal timeKPIandaccountingmeasuresforeach personthatimpactstheperformanceofthe Figure 1 - Creating Dynamic Performance MeasuresDynamic Performance MeasuresDynamic PerformanceMeasures1.Line Performance/OEE2.Energy Costs3.Contribution Margin4.Perfect OrderOEECycle TimeWaste/ProductionFirst Pass YieldContribution MarginEnergy1 CostEnergy2 CostMaterial1 CostProduction ValueBusiness GuidanceProduction ProcessManufacturing StrategyReal TimeKPIsReal TimeAccountingFigure 2 - Using the Vollman Triangle to Apply Strategic Decomposition ProcessStrategic DecompositionProduction ProcessCorporatePlantDivisionUnitStrategyAction MeasureVollman TriangleAreaUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 15 11/14/08 7:01:17 PMdecember/january 200914nance teams. In interviewing a NASCAR driver and a pit crew chief, I noticed how well they tendedtocooperate.Iaskedthemif,asis common in industrial plants, the pit crew was measured on the availability of the car and the operatormeasuredontheutilization.They toldmethatalthoughutilizationandavail-ability(ormaintainedstate,whichmaybea much better measure than classic availability) are important, the primary measure of both is winningtherace.Iaskedthepitcrewchief if, upon detecting a problem with the car that might negatively impact the maintained state, hewouldcallthecarintothepit.Hesaid, Only if the problem means we wont win the race.Then I asked the driver if he would re-fusetocomeintothepitifcalledinbythe crewchief.Hesaid,noway,Iknowheis calling me in because Ill lose the race if some-thing is not done.You see, for both parties, the primary focus is winning.And since they have a shared focus, they not only trust each other, but they cooperate extremely well.So howcanwedefinewinningforfrontline maintenanceteamsandoperatorsinindus-trial plants to engender the same level of co-operation and even collaboration?Most plant management teams are measured ondrivingthemaximumproductionvalue from the plant assets over an extended period of time.Certainly the utilization and availabil-ity of each plant asset impacts business value, but neither should be treated as the primary measure of performance of any industrial op-eration.Therealvictoryinindustrialplants isdrivingthemaximumbusinessvaluefrom each plant asset over time.If every operator andmaintenancepersonhasaprimarymea-sure based on this win, the behaviors of each will change drastically and the behavior of the plantwillfollowsuit.Industrialcompanies must empower frontline teams with the infor-mation, in the form of DPMs, which will drive bothcollaborationandcontinuouslyimprov-ing business value from all plant assets.AssetPerformanceManagement(APM)driv-enbyDPMsresultsinoperationsandmain-tenanceworkingtogethertobalanceplant operationsforoptimalbusinessvalueinall circumstances.The primary measure of both frontlineteamsisbusinessvalue.Second-arymeasuresformaintenanceincludethe maintainedstateoftheequipmentandthe probability of a failure over time.Secondary measuresforoperationsincludeoperation tomaintainedstateandtheprobabilityofa failureovertime.WithallDPMsprioritized to the manufacturing strategy in place, every personintheorganizationwillbepullingin thesamedirection.Theywillallbefocused on winning. They will all be focused on do-ingtheirpart,but,evenmoreproductively, doing it within the context of the overall per-formance of the operation.Aninterestingsymmetrydevelopsbetween operationsteamsandmaintenanceteams whenatrueassetperformancemanagement approach is taken.Both operations and main-tenancehaveadvancedinthreestepswith the evolution of technology in each area over time.Technologyimpactedoperationsby first providing regulatory control, followed by advancedcontrol,thenfollowedbyprocess optimization.Maintenance had a similar pro-gression from reactive, to preventive and then topredictivemaintenance.Aseachprogres-sion was underway, the KPIs for each function were used to measure progress.The next step, asset performance management, occurs when thetwofrontlinefunctionsconvergearound newmeasuresofperformancethatcombine accountingandoperationalmeasuresinto acomprehensive,prioritizedperformance measurement system called DPM.This is the pointatwhichcrosssilocollaborationtakes hold and breakthrough levels of performance are attained.SummaryIndustry is on the verge of a major new wave inperformanceimprovementdrivenbycol-laborationacrossorganizationalsilosguided byDynamicPerformanceMeasures.Forthis new wave to really take hold, industrial man-agement and engineering have to escape from theresidueoftheindustrialrevolutionand stop thinking of operations and maintenance teams as an unskilled, uneducated labor force. Frontlinepersonnelareresponsibleformak-Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 16 11/14/08 7:01:22 PMwww.uptimemagazine.com15Amidstreamcompanyinthenaturalgasbusinesshasalarge gathering network throughout the Southwest.Operating in the U.S.,CanadaandEurope,thenaturalgaswholesalerdealsin trading, marketing, transmission processing and distribution of both natural gas and electricity. Anextremelycompetitivemarketandhigh-volumedemand haveforcedmidstreamcompaniestopushtheirtransmission and gathering systems to full capacity.Pushing aging systems tomaximumproductioncausesariseinsystembreakdowns and compressor failures.Balancing maximum production with minimum machine failure is essential to optimizing asset perfor-mance.In other words, this company needed to get as much to-tal running time out of its eld equipment and reduce the mean time between failure or scheduled maintenance.The user knew thatthesetwoobjectivesutilizationandoptimizationare functionalopposites,andtheyrequirenewmethodstodeter-mine the ideal mix for operations.They needed a system that combinedbothofthesefunctionstoprovidereal-timeasset performance management. Previously,maintenancemanage-mentwasjustschedulingemer-gency repair with periodic service. Inaddition,theoperationsgroup wasreactingtomachinefailure as it happened, without regard for planned production schedules. Op-erationsneededtondawayto manageitsassetsforthegreatest uptimetoproducegasmoreef-ciently and to minimize equipment failure and subsequent costs.MaintenanceandOperationsman-agerscouldutilizeriskmanage-menttoolstodeterminehowto act, if machine health and the time to failure could be estimated.This key informationwould allow main-tenance and operation managers to answer key questions such as: Can the machine make it to the next scheduled PM? and CanImeetmyproductionschedulewiththemachineinthis condition?Process operators could then manage their process and determine how to act to minimize losses and optimize eco-nomic benets.Another customer challenge came from the shear competitive-ness of the market.Gas gathering and delivery is a commod-itymarket,requiringmaximumthroughputatmaximumasset utilization and absolute low cost.Any technology upgrade must have a measurable and sustainable Return on Investment.A lim-ited staff to maximize prots has also strained the maintenance organization, which further complicated production efforts. The customer had invested in data systems that are useful for condition monitoring, but had not closed the loop from data to diagnostics to maintenance planning to operations forecasting. They had the data, but it was difcult to correlate across their manysystemsintheeld. Asystemthatwouldintegrateall the different inputs to actually analyze and generate actionable resultswasacriticalneed.Thechallengewastodetermine preventable downtime leading to lost opportunity from pipeline production.They also needed to estimate the production time they could recover from this improved use of the data. THE SOLUTION AnEnterpriseControlSystem(ECS)provideanumberofben-ets to this customer.Perhaps the most important element that yieldsrealassetperformancebenetsistheuseofreal-time processdata.DynamicPerformanceIndicatorsweregenerat-ed by taking inputs from a variety of real-time measurements from plant oor devices.A key element to the solution for this company is the ability of the Invensis InFusion ECSto model typical machine behavior through all operating conditions and generatealertsthatidentifythedeviationoffailingcompo-nents from normal operation.An incident alarm, based on multiple sensor condition rules, denes the machineconditionandprovides diagnostics for failure mode anal-ysis.Sensor alert tolerances inci-dentandalarmrulesaredened by the user.Thecompanywasdoingallit couldtomanagetheinputsfrom thesensorsandtosubsequently makeeducateddecisionsbased onitsprocessknowledge.How-ever,theInFusionECSallowed theusertotakethereal-time controlinformationandpushit through.Ultimately, the InFusion ECSfunctionedinatrulycollab-orative method, with these major improvements: Asset Performance Management Leads to Major Improvements for Gas Field OperatorAsset Performance Management Balances Utilization and AvailabilityUTILIZATIONAVAILABILITYAsset Economic ValueAsset Performance ManagementProcess OptimizationAsset Management1. Real-time process control data brought in critical measurements2. Multiple protocols and multiple devices were easily cong-ured by the InFusion Distributed Control System layer using the InFusion Engineering Environment 3. Real time process measurements were fed into Avantis soft-ware, Invensys asset intelligence system, to predict critical and non-critical failures4. Dynamic Performance Measures were generated from a Watch List which created an Asset Optimization result5. Corrective maintenance activities were acted upon based on a nancial impact basis 6. Work orders were automatically delivered to MaintenanceengineersUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 17 11/14/08 7:01:31 PM16december/january 200916ing, or losing, most industrial opera-tions more money minute by minute than any other group in industry.It is time we start treating them as the performancemanagerstheyareby empowering them with DPMs. Ontopofthis,industrialmanage-mentmuststarttobreakdownthe organizationalsilosthathaveex-istedinplantsfordecadeswhile simultaneouslypreservingthespe-cialized knowledge and capability of eachteamintheplant.Again,this can be achieved by empowering the teams with the correct performance measuresthatdefinethewinfor thebusiness.Whenthisisaccom-plished,theresultisanewperfor-mance-generatingcollaborative approachtoplantoperationcalled asset performance management.As-set performance management is the industrial performance wave that is just starting to crest. Those industrial concerns that catch this wave willbetheperformanceleadersofthisnew millennium.Peter G. Martin, PhD, D. Eng., joined The Foxboro Company in the 1970s and has worked in a variety of positions in training, engineering, product planning, marketing and strategic planning.He left Foxboro to become Vice President at Intech Controls and also at Automation Research Corpora-tion before returning to Invensys in 1996.Since his return, he has been VP of Marketing for Foxboro and Chief Marketing Officer for Invensys Manufacturing and Process Systems prior to moving into his current position, VP Strategic Ventures.He has written two books: Bottom Line Automation and Dynamic Perfor-mance Management: The Pathway to World Class Manufacturing.Dr. Martin holds multiple patents, including the patent for Dynamic Performance Measures, Real-Time Activity-Based Costing, Closed-loop business control, and Asset and Resource Modeling, which are the basis for Fortune recently naming him a Hero of U.S. Manufacturing.He was also recently named as one of the 50 Most Influential Innova-tors of All Time by the Instrument, Systems and Automation Society (ISA).Dr. Martin has BA and MS degrees in Mathemat-ics, an MA degree in Administration and Man-agement, a Master of Biblical Studies degree, and a D. Eng in Industrial Engineering and a PhD in Biblical Studies.ISO-Based Training & CertificationVibration Institute follows ISO 18436:2 for certification and ISO/DIS 18436:3 for trainingThe Vibration Institute began training vibrationanalysts in 1973. Certification of vibration analystsbegan in 1993.Each of the Institutes certified instructors havemore than 25 years of field experience.Analysts trained by the Vibration Institute arealways welcome to contact the Institute for expertadvice from an individual, not a computer.Vibration Institute6262 South Kingery Highway, Suite 212Willowbrook, Illinois 60527For more information call 630/654-2254 orvisit our website at www.vibinst.orgFigure 3 - Asset Performance Management ProcessAsset Performance ManagementProduction ProcessAsset ManagementDynamicPerformanceMeasuresMaintenanceKPIsOperationsManagementAssetPerformanceManagementOptimization PredictivePreventiveReactiveProcessControlAdvancedControlProductionKPIsUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 18 11/14/08 7:01:34 PMVisit www.maintenance.org to join the fastest growing professional maintenance organization.Its free.Markthe dates for theseAMP events planned in 2009 on your calendarAs part of its mission to facilitate and support learning, networking and real world examples of reliability in action, the Association for Maintenance Professionals (AMP) hosted a Breakthrough Learning Exchange at the Timken Campus in Canton, Ohio and a plant tour and at the nearby Faircrest Steel mill on October 19th.Over 50 maintenance professionals gathered to meet new friends in the maintenance profession, hear three enlightening presentations and get a behind the scenes look at a plant producing high-end steel.Presenters included:Terrence OHanlon, Publisher of Reliabilityweb.com and Uptime magazine, Jason Tranter, Managing Director of the Mobius Institute and Steve Smith, Timken Steel Maintenance Manager.The day was full of learning, exchange and community building, all of which AMP will continue to facilitate throughout 2009 and beyond.The Association of Maintenance Professionals would like to extend a special thanks to Timken for your generous support of the maintenance and reli-ability community.April 14thWind Energy ReliabilityTimken Campus Canton, OhioThis learning/networking event will introduce reliability management concepts to wind energy operators.Watch for more program details and registration information at: http://www.maintenanceconference.comJune 16thGreen ReliabilityTimken CampusCanton, OhioThis learning and networking event will focus on quick payback areas for reducing industrial plant energy usage such as compressed air, steam, building leaks using ultrasound, infrared etc...September 22ndExecutive Level Plant Asset Reliability ForumTimken CampusCanton OhioThis event is a business level event geared toward Directors, Vice Presidents and C-Level executives to discuss competitive business ad-vantages and the strategic benefts of reliability improvements as well as provide an executive roadmap they can use to begin the process within their own companies.Thank YouMost of the group at Timkens World HQFaircrest Steel MillUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 19 11/14/08 2:11:45 PMdecember/january 2009The Third Dimension Optimizing Your PMs in 3-Dby Ed Stanek, Jr and Tibor Jung information technologyuploadwide variety of conditions have elevated visibility of the term PMOptimization, and it is now on everyones reliability radar.Whether its the demand for greater asset reliability, survival of impending maintenance reductions, or searching for the perfect complementary effort to partner with an RCM program, PMOpti-mization may be the missing link in your reliability efforts.The question isnt so much Is PMOptimiza-tion the right path?, but what to do once youve begun. The term itself, PMOptimization evokes a feeling of established process evolution, control, and confi-dence (implying that we all should be doing it to some degree), but defining PMOptimization may be more difficult than it appears.Few maintenance and reliabil-ity initiatives have had such a clear and direct title with such an undefined process behind it, as the definition differs greatly depending upon whom you ask.Ranging from individual efforts to scrubbing PMs, to a less-painful version of RCM (RCM-Lite), each optimize to some degree but miss the totality in which Optimiza-tion can be implemented.To completely optimize means targeting both the effec-tiveness (failure avoidance), of which we are all familiar, as well as the often overlooked efficiency opportunities hidden within the existing PMs.This picture is com-pleted in a formal, eleven-step 3-dimensional approach which takes full advantage of all opportunities found within the PM.PM, typically short for Preventive Maintenance, has many varying definitions, but for the sake of this article, we will refer to PM as Regularly scheduled activities performed on equipment to prevent, detect or predict failure, and maintain operating parameters as required by the user.The abbreviation PM is expanded here to include any activity that fits this definition, includ-ing Preventive Maintenance, Predictive Maintenance (or Condition-based Monitoring), Operator tasks & inspec-tions (sometimes part of a TPM program), etc.While PMs can come in many different forms from checklists, to paragraphs of procedures and detailed instructions; in order to optimize a PM, individual tasks within the PM text must be isolated.A PM task protects required equipment functions against specific failure modes.In short, you cannot optimize a whole PM.You can only optimize individual PM tasks within a PM.It is also important to understand that while failures happen to the function, they typically happen at a component level.The definition of PM Optimization then is to ensure that PM tasks provide the required protection at the component level as defined above, using minimal required resources.3-Dimensional PMOptimizationSM is a process which first opens capacity and elevates effectiveness through Initial Optimization (the 1st dimension), and continues to dial in the process through an ongoing PM Task Pass/Fail Analysis (the 2nd dimension) and Equipment Reliability Analysis (the 3rd dimension).It requires only a fraction of the time and resources of other methods, and typically results in: 40% Reduction in PM Labor Hours 35% Reduction in Scheduled Downtime 50-100% Increase in PM CoverageWhy arent PMs optimized today?There are many rea-sons contributing to the very conditions we are trying to improve, some of which are: PMs that are developed from equipment manuals Highly visible failures can lead to more & more PM activities PMs copied across many pieces of equipment (generic PMs) CMMS limitations which dont provide the ability to develop, manage or optimize PMs.They simply provide a space to place them, assuming they were built in an optimized manor, and have limited abil- ity to analyze the PM Effectiveness at a task level. We already have a backlog, so staff 18AEditors Note: We published this article with specifc references to 3Dimensional PMOptimizationSM software in order to tell more people about potential solutions as maintenance and reliability information management evolves.We did not want to make it generic.There are other unique software products that we will also be presenting to you in Uptime.In order to bring you the full impact of the capabilities of some of these new technologies - we have decided to allow product specifcity - not as an endorsement - but to create an enhanced understanding of the rapidly changing landscape of Infor-mation Technology.Uptime is comfortable stepping out of the limited and traditional etiquette of magazine publishing and we hope you see the value in our decision.We certainly invite your feedback as we continue to move forward.Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 20 11/14/08 5:02:12 PM doesnt have time because this work would be additive. Does 3-Dimensional PMOptimizationSM Fit With Other Existing Efforts? Therearefew,butcommon,approachesto-wards optimizing the existing PM program. Common approaches found throughout the in-dustry include:Craft feedback on completed PMs, PM Data Scrubbing manually performed by a team who compares history to the PM content and analytical processes such as RCM and FMEA.The good news is that you dont havetochoose,astheyallhavetheirplace in the journey and are all intended to provide the right task with the right frequency (Figure 1).But the important thing is not only to per-form the right task at the right frequency, but dosowiththeoptimumuseofmaintenance resources,whichisdependentuponthede-gree of difficulty or how easy is the process is to implement.Mostorganizationsthathaveutilized3-Di-mensionalPMOptimizationdidsobecause theystruggledwithobtainingtheoptimum benefitfromasingleinitiative.Theamount of labor required, coupled with all of the his-toricaldataneeded,makeRCMandFMEA tools that should be reserved for high critical-ity equipment that warrants the additional ef-fort.EnablingtheapplicationofPMOptimization on all equipment, even after an RCM exercise (forefficiency)providesanapproachacross the entire asset base.This data should drive andgrowthesystemsothatitcanbelever-aged across the organization, and even across languages.1st Dimension: Initial OptimizationThe first step of Initial Optimization, prior to beginningtooptimizeindividualtasks,isto determine if the existing tasks add value.We have found that on the average up to 20% of the existing PM tasks do not add value, or are so generic that they cannot be deciphered!A majorcontributortothisisthatPMsareof-ten copied from either the vendor manual or otherequipmentPMswithoutactuallybeing verifiedattheequipment.Not onlyaresomeofthesecopied tasksinaccurate,evenaccurate tasks might not be warranted due to the criticality of the equipment beingreviewed.Furthermore, PMsoftencontaintasksthatare redundantwithotherPMtasks, eitherintheCMMSunderdif-ferenttradesorfrequencies,or other systems such as Lubrication routes,PredictiveMaintenance routes,OperatorchecksorTPM, etc.Ofthetasksthatremain, somecanevenbedesignedout (MaintenancePrevention)with onlyminorequipmentmaintain-www.uptimemagazine.com19ability/accessibility modifications.Next, it must be determined if the remaining tasks are, indeed, the best tasks to protect re-quiredequipmentfunctionsagainstthespe-cific failure modes.A process of Task Promo-tion assists the user in determining if there is a better task to give the same or greater level ofprotection.PromotiontoahigherTask Typeoftenprovidesseveralbenefits,includ-ingreducedlabor,taskduration,downtime, materials cost, etc.Here are the specific Task Types:Task Type 1: Action-based PM Task (e.g. replacement, cleaning, lubrication, adjustment, calibration)Task Type 2: Subjective Inspection Condition as perceived by the inspectorTask Type 3: Objective Inspection Condition as measuredTask Type 4: Condition MonitoringAs a final step of Task Promotion, the equip-ment should be reviewed to determine if ex-ecutionofataskcanbemadesimplerwith minor equipment maintainability/accessibility improvementssuchasmodifyingguarding, pipingoutlubricationorinspectionpoints, providingvisualconditionindicators,etc. This could allow further promotion to an even better task. Oncetheoptimumtaskisselected,thePM tasks are further scrutinized for the best way toexecute.Forexample,isthetaskbeing performed by the person with the lowest ap-propriateskillset?Ifataskiswrittentoa levelofdetailthatincludestheprotected equipmentfunction,failuremodes,andPM activities(particularlyifpromotedtoaType 2or3Inspection),itoftendoesnotrequire atopleveltechnician.Infact,itbecomes agreattoolfortrainingnewtechnicians. Figure 1 - 3-Dimensional PMOptimization can be applied on its own or in combi-nation with other maintenance initiatives.RCM / PMOptimizationPartnershipResources Required (Labor & Material)Equipment QuantityEquipment Criticality Low HighRCM/FMEAhOOtMntinFCraft Feedback/Data ScrubbingLeverage Zone3-Dimensional PMOptimizationSMFigure 2 - Automatic calculation of time savings and downtime savings.Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 21 11/14/08 5:07:24 PMdecember/january 200920Would a job plan help to ensure quick task ex-ecution with consistent results, particularly if resourcesorspecificconditionsarerequired to execute the task?Could some of the tasks beperformedwithoutinterferingwithPro-duction?Lets face it, the equipment exists to makesomeformofproduct.Wheneveritis down for PM, we are not making product, and likely not making money!Finally, the optimal frequencyofeachPMtaskshouldbedeter-mined.In most cases, the data to make this decision does not exist because failures have not been tracked accurately nor in enough de-tail.Yet frequency is often the first place peo-ple look when they consider optimizing a PM: Can I do the task less often?3-Dimensional PMOptimizationaddressesfrequencyonly afterapplying14techniquesthatverifythe task is legitimate, that it is the optimum task, and that we are performing it in the best way. Furthermore, reducing a frequency carries the potential of introducing additional risk.While this risk must be weighed against the poten-tialbenefits,considerthatthefrequencyas-signed to a particular task is often determined based upon when we are already scheduled to do other tasks.If we have a monthly PM and theneedforanewtaskarises,wetypically also include it in the monthly PM.PM Optimization Example using Multiple Optimization Techniques: PM on an Air Handler Unit Original PM Task: Change 8 HEPA filters on an Air Handler Unit quarterly (Figure 3) Optimization: The client installed a magnehe-lic gauge to measure pressure drop across the filters(modification)&determinedthepres-sure at which the filters required replacement (nowanObjectiveInspection)basedonair volumerequirements&filterspecifications. Theyalsomarkedthewarningzoneonthe gauge in red (visual workplace).This allowed TaskPromotionfromType1RReplacement Tasktotwonewtasks:the1stisaType3 Objective Inspection and the 2nd is a Type 2 Subjective Inspection.These inspections can nowbeperformedbytheoperatorwhilein the area, and are actually checked three times moreoften.Thenewtasksalsodonotre-quire equipment downtime to perform.This example is provided for illustration pur-poses because it utilizes multiple techniques of PM Optimization.Although the results shown in Figure 4 are typical, there are other items to consider.For example, the filters will still have to be changed eventually; how-ever, it will be based upon condition and the replacement will be performed as a planned & scheduled corrective maintenance job.Please note also that the cost savings of the Web: www.datastick.com/utEmail: ndout@datastick.comTalk to an actual human being:Toll-free in USA 888 277 5153 or call 408 987 3400 2008 Datastick Systems Inc. Patents pending. Datastick is a registered trademark and SiteConnex and VSA are trademarks of Datastick Systems, Inc.Two Barriers to UsingVibration Analysis:Cost. Know-How.Datastick BreaksBoth Barriers.Datastick Breaks the Cost Barrier:We could say, Datastick breaks the price barrier, and with handheld systems from around $6,000 thats true. But what about your total cost of ownership? Datastick keeps it low be-cause theres no mandatory annual fee. If you want an optional service or support agreement, youll nd theyre designed and priced to help you, not scare you away.Datastick Breaks the Know-How Barrier:You can learn to use the handheld device in a couple of hours. If youre short on in-house vibration expertise, dont worry. The included Datastick Reporting System software for your PC is based on Microsoft Excel. That means that you can share your data, graphs, and reports with any in-house vibration analyst or outside consultant. And with our new smartphone-basedSiteConnex VSA-2215, you can even email vibration data directly from the eld.FREE White Paper: Breaking the Barriers to Affordable Vibration Analysiswww.datastick.com/nobarriersSee us at IMC 2008 Dec. 910 Bonita Springs, FloridaFigure 3: HEPA Filters on Air Handler UnitUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 22 11/14/08 5:02:20 PMwww.uptimemagazine.com21filters was not included in this example. Added Effectiveness for GreaterReliabilityAtthispointwemustreviewtheequipment history for indications of failure on functions that should have been protected by the origi-nal PM.A failure may indicate that the PM is not fully effective.Although many companies The optimization of the existing PMs for effi-ciency, combined with failure review, typically provides the optimal results based on current data systems available for PM content and fail-urerecording.Whileperformingtheabove PMoptimizationforefficiencytofreeupla-bor,invariablyadditionalopportunitiesfor greater effectiveness in the PM are uncovered. These can be anywhere from failure modes on existingcomponentsthathavenotbeenad-dressed adequately, to components that have not been addressed at all, to entire functions that have not been included in the PM previ-ously.These are potential failure mode items that can take PM effectiveness to the next lev-elforevengreaterreliability.Companiesare typicallyidentifyingfrom50-100%additional PM coverage for likely failure modes as com-pared to the original PMs! BecausetheaddedPMtasksarefullyopti-mized during development, the PM efficiency gains are not reduced significantly due to the addedPMcoverage.Forthosemaintenance organizationsthathaveanexistingRCMor FMEAeffortinplace,analysisoftheseaddi-tionalitemsareanexcellentopportunityto partnerwiththeseotherefforts,makingPM Optimizationacomplementaryinitiativeto oftendonothaveanaccurateformalequip-ment history documented to an adequate lev-elofdetail,anundocumented,informalhis-tory usually does exist.This is the history in the experience of the people that have oper-ated & maintained the equipment in the past, includingequipmentoperators,maintenance technicians, engineers, even vendors and con-tractors.Task Description Labor Production DowntimeTask(Failure Modes __)Task TypeFreq.(X/Yr)Skill/Craft 1 X (Min)Annual (Min)1 X (Min)Annual (Min)Original PM TaskChange 8 HEPA Filters 1R ReplaceQ 4XHVAC Tech 240 960 300 1200Optimized PM TasksCheck Magnehelic Gauge (Filter Dirty __)3 Obj. Inspect.M 12XOperator 2 24 0 0Visually inspect flters via window (Damaged__) (Blown through__)2 Subj.Inspect.M12XOperator 2 24 0 0Optimization Results3X300%No Crafts Reqd.Reduced 236 Min98%Reduced936 Min97%Reduced 300 Min100%Reduced 1200 Min100%Figure 4 - Simple example of an optimized PM task using multiple PM Optimization techniquesUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 23 11/14/08 5:02:25 PMreading can then be used to trend equipment condition,effectivelyturningaType3Objec-tive Inspection into a Type 4 Condition Moni-toringtask.Whatiscurrentlydonewiththis gathereddata?Withlimitedtechnology,the most common answer unfortunately is to put it in a file system or create an additional spread-sheet.Either of these choices demonstrates a disconnectbetweenPMDataandfurtherdy-namic Optimization. Because this process is very data-intensive (i.e. numberofmachines,timesnumbersoffunc-tions,timesnumberofcomponents,times numberoffailuremodes/likelycauses),itis recommended that the process be automated (Figure 5), or it wont happen.CMMS software packages,whetherpartofanERPapplication orstand-alone,areinvaluabletoaMainte-nanceorganization.However,veryfewtreat PM tasks as individual live records at the failure mode level.Rather they provide a place to put the PM tasks as part of an overall PM.3rd Dimension: Equipment Reliability AnalysisThe final aspect of 3-Dimensional PMOptimiza-tion is the ability to communicate with day-to-day-events from the equipment to an ongoing evaluation of the PM activities.The basic ques-tion is, Are the failures or undesirable events ontheequipmentpreventablethroughPM and what gaps exist in the data?Again, when completed,thistaskistypicallyperformed manually, outside the PM data as there is a dis-connect between the failure under review and the PM data intended to preserve the compo-nent.Thisdataresidesindatasystemssuch as the CMMS , equipment downtime tracking, OverallEquipmentEffectivenessmonitoring, SCADAsystems,PLCfaulttracking,etc.Each ofthesethatexistatthesiteshould provide feedback to the PM system as an indication of equipment reliability, againallowingreal-timemonitoring oftheeffectivenessofthePMtasks. Such a process links existing informa-tionsystemswithasystemusedto changebehaviorinhowwecarefor our equipment assets.Theprocessof3-DimensionalPMOp-timizationSM takes the PM program to previouslyunreachablenewlevelsby fusingcommonsense,reliabilitydis-ciplines, and automation powered by ReliabilityFusionTM,theworldsfirst 3-D PMOptimization system.Edward J. Stanek, Jr. is the Co-Owner / President ofLAI Reliability Systems, Inc.Ed has been involved in the development of reliability and maintenance systems for the past 22 years, and has worked extensively on TPM implementation and process develop-ment with small to medium-sized compa-nies.Building shop floor involvement and maintenance support systems, his projects set record-breaking performance improve-ments.As Co-Owner and President of LAI, Ed leads the organization with ongoing product development and unique processes.Combin-ing the concepts of constraint management and reliability, Ed, who is a past chairman of STLE, has redefined how Maintenance Optimization and Continuous Improvement are implemented.Tibor L. Jung is the Co-Owner / VP / Senior Project Leader for LAI Reliability Systems, Inc. Tibor has over 25 years of experience in the maintenance & reliability field as a represen-tative of LAI.His vast equipment reliability experience was the foundation that allowed him to develop a side of LAIs offerings that focuses on the business processes of mainte-nance & reliability.His expertise in optimiz-ing both key Production processes as well as Maintenance & Reliability processes allows him to provide more holistic solutions to clients needs that are geared towards bring-ing together previously conflicting factions within clients organizations, with the focus of greater reliability to get more product out the door and to lower costs.LAI Reliability Systems , PM Optimization, 3-D PM Optimization, 3-Dimensional PM Optimization, and Reliability Fusion are service marks of LAI Reliability Systems, Inc., Antioch, Illinois (with regional offices in Franklin, Tennessee).All rights reserved.16december/january 200922RCM & FMEA, rather than a compet-ing initiative (Figure 1).Optimization at the PM LevelAftereachofthePMtasksisopti-mized and assigned accurate schedul-ingcriteria(e.g.frequency,skill/craft, run status, etc.), the tasks are grouped back together into PMs according to thesecriteria.Atthispoint,thePM tasks can be further optimized by ap-plying more efficient means to execute them as groups of PM tasks.Examples include issuing PM tasks as part of an organizedroute,separatingdown PMtasksfromrunningPMtasks, scheduling PMs only after all required resourcesareavailable,andschedul-ing for the lowest skill level required. OptimizationofthePMprocessisalsoad-dressedatthispoint.SomePMtasksthat areinspections(Type2SubjectiveorType3 Objective)aresometimeswrittenasInspect &changeifnecessary.Whensomethingis found to be wrong during one of these PM in-spection tasks, dont immediately fix it (unless it meets predefined criteria).Often times when a craftsperson finds something wrong during a PM, he feels he has not done his job if he walks awaywithoutmakinganattempttofixit.Is the work required to correct the identified item planned?Does he have the parts, special tools, manuals, etc. in hand?Does he have time?If the answer to any of these is no, he is likely doingREACTIVEmaintenancewithinthePM. AcrucialroleofgoodPMtasksistoidentify abacklogofworkthatcanbemademoreef-ficient through good planning and scheduling. Create a corrective or repair type work order to document the item and put it in the system to be planned and scheduled.2nd Dimension:PM Task Pass/Fail AnalysisOnce the Initial PM Optimization is complete, it is critical to get feedback from the PM process as confirmation of the decisions made, as well as to look for additional opportunities for fur-ther optimization.Since the PM tasks exist to protectrequiredequipmentfunctionsagainst specific failure modes, dynamic feedback must be provided for either the failure mode and/or its root cause.This is referred to as PM Task Pass/FailAnalysis.Thresholdssetforpass/fail for each failure mode, cause or reading taken, makeitpossibletomonitortheeffectiveness ofthePMtasksreal-time.Also,ifataskex-ists for gathering a reading from a gauge, the Figure 5 - PM Task Pass/Fail Analysis allows real-time monitoring of the PM Tasks.Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 24 11/14/08 5:02:33 PMwww.uptimemagazine.com27www.uptimemagazine.comSolution Partners for Efective SAP Plant MaintenanceThe best in independent solutions for your SAP-Plant Maintenance systemLooking for help with SAP?Providers of Expert Reliability Methodogies, RCM Turbo and SOS (Spares Optimization System)North America: 508.359.1966 Australasia: +61 3 9455 2211www.strategicorp.comAvailability Workbench - Powerful Simulation Software for Maintenance Optimization1.949.502.5919www.availabilityworkbench.com Operator Inspection, Predictive Maintenance, Reliability Software604.984.3674www.desmaint.comPractical Daily Scheduling in SAP Plant Maintenance1.866.515.DTSI (3874)www.sapscheduling.comSuccessful Implementations Through Reliability Data Enhancement+1.203.264.0500www.mrginc.comDeveloping Reliability Solutions to Improve People, Processes & Technology 770.717.2737www.pcaconsulting.comAsset Performance Management Solutions for SAP EAMToll Free 1.877.746.3787www.ivara.comSAMI - A Knowledge Transfer Company for Industrial Organizations+1.860.675.0439www.samicorp.comLeveraging Maintenance & Reliability to Improve Customer Performance877.234.6756http://usservice.abb.com/Reliability Improvement Software That Interfaces Via Netweaver+613 93150330www.pmoptimisation.com.auWell...look no further.SAP and other SAP products and services mentioned herein as well as their respective logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of SAP AG in Germany and in several other countries all over the world. SAPCenter.com is in no way connected to nor endorsed by SAP AG.Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 25 11/13/08 10:59:53 PMdecember/january 2009oftheprimaryswitchgearintheirelectricaldistribution system which feeds one paper machine and several smaller operationswithintheplant.Animpendingten-dayshut-downincreasedthesenseofurgencysinceallwindows could be fitted for one machine during that period.IRISS, inc. was commissioned by the paper mill to conduct a pre-site inspection to ascertain the optimal position and quantityofwindowswhichwouldgivethermographers thoroughvisibilityofdesiredtargets.Theconclusions from the initial inspection are noted in Table 1.The customer ordered 200 units of assorted 3-inch diam-eterand4-inchdiameterInfraredInspectionWindows tocompletetheinstallation.197windowswerelaterin-stalled.Investment197infraredinspectionwindowstotaled$42,050.00. IRISSwasalsoretainedtosupplyaninstallationteamto performtheinstallationoftheIRwindows.Installation costs sited in Table 2 were calculated using the following assumptions: Two-man installation team at $625.00 each per day (total cost $1,300 per day) x 10 Days = $13,000.00$30.00 per window installation chargex 197 Windows = $5,910.00paper mill in South Carolina had a very successful infrared inspection program that management wanted to ex-pand.However, the requirements of NFPA 70E were causing them to re-think their strategy since inspections of energized equipment was becoming more restrictive, more time consuming and more costly. Furthermore, 8% of the mills applications had never been surveyed due to either switched interlocks (which automatically deenergize the equipment upon opening, thereby preventing access to energized components), or to incident energy calculations in excess of 100 cal/cm2 on certain equipment (which exceeds personal protective equipment [PPE]] ratings, and would place personnel in extreme danger and open the company to OSHA fines).In search of alternative methods of conducting safer, stan-dards-compliant inspections, the corporate Reliability Engi-neerinvestigatedhowinfraredinspectionwindows(com-monly referred to as IR windows, viewports or sightglasses) might be utilized. It was determined that:Use of Infrared Windows for routine inspections of healthy equipment did not require the elevated levels of PPE required in 70E, since as stated in 70E 100: Under normal operating conditions, enclosed ener-gized equipment that has been properly installed and maintained is not likely to pose an arc flash hazard.In NFPA terms, an IR window maintains an enclosed state for the switchgear, MCC, Transformer, etc., and maintains energized components and circuit parts in a guarded condition.Therefore, the hazard/risk cate- gory would be equal to that of reading a panel meter, using a visual inspection pane for lockout/tagout confirmations, or walking past enclosed, energized equipment.Use of IR windows or sightglasses would eliminate the need for a supporting cast of electricians to remove and reinstall panel covers.Those critical personnel would then be available to perform other tasks which were often being outsourced.Use of infrared windows would provide an efficient method to perform inspections.This would make more frequent inspections feasible for critical or sus-pect applications to ensure plant uptime.Use of IR windows would provide non-intrusive access to electrical applications; therefore, surveys could be conducted without elevating risk to plant assets and processes, meaning that inspections could be conducted during peak hours for the best diagnostic data.Use of IR windows and closed panel inspection would eliminate high-risk tasks during inspections and thereby increase safety for thermographers.The focus of the mills initiative was to facilitate inspection infrareduploadWindows Open the Door to Savings A Study of a Positive, and Growing, Return on Investment by Martin Robinson A24Application Quantity13.8 kV Primary Switchgear15Secondary Switchgear 22Transformers (13.8 kV) 27MCCs 2Miscellaneous Switchgear 2Generators 2Total Assemblies 70Inspection Compartments 147IR Windows 197Table 1 - Equipment ListUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 26 11/16/08 2:01:49 PMwww.uptimemagazine.com 13C-RangeInfrared SightglassesARC RESISTANT FOR SAFE ELECTRICALINFRARED INSPECTIONSANY VOLTAGE,ANY CAMERA,ANYWHERE50kA Arc Res|stant Des|gnUL/cUL/CSA ApprovedOutdoor & Indoor Cert|edInfrared, V|sua| & Fus|on Capab|eHawk IR Internat|ona| Inc.5309 Monroe RoadCharlotteNC 28205United StatesEmail. sales@hawk-ir.comTOLL FREE. 1-877-4-HAWKIRwww.hawk-|r.comCLIRVU II QUADRABANDTMVISUALLY CAPABLE FUSION CAPABLE AUTOGROUNDINGTMMOISTURE RESISTANT ARC-RESISTANTUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 27 11/13/08 11:00:49 PMdecember/january 200926The InstallationInstallationoftheinfraredinspectionpanes wasconductedduringthreenightsandthree daysduringtheten-dayshutdown.Somein-stallationswerecompletedonlivegearus-ingadditionalsafetymeasures;however,the vastmajoritywereconductedondeenergized equipment in what NFPA terms an electrically safe work condition. Althoughtheplanallowedfortwelve-hour shifts, installers were quickly and safely moving at a rate of approximately six window installa-tions per hour, and were finishing the plant on thenightshiftswithinsixhours.Installations duringnormalbusinesshoursallowedmuch more flexibility; therefore all live works were completed during these periods. When the cli-ents electricians assisted with the installations, theinstallationrateswerealsofasterthan originallyplanned(7to8windowsperhour). Allwindowinstallationswerecompletedwell within the allotted timelines.Inspection Cost AnalysisPrior to the installation of the IR windows, all infrared inspections were completed on open, energized gear. Therefore, PPE, live works pro-cedures,riskassessments,permits,etc.were requiredforallinspections,andasnotedear-lier,severalapplicationshadneverbeensur-veyed due to safety restrictions. Thepapermillhadpreviouslyinvestedinits own infrared camera and an on-staff thermog-rapher.Thethermographerwastrainedand qualified to assist in opening panels on ener-gizedgear.Therefore,someefficiencieswere alreadyinplacewhencomparedtoatypical crew of a single thermographer + two electri-cians. Consequently, the man-hour calculations forthetraditionalinspectionareactually conservative.Table 3 details the man-hour costs for infrared surveysusingin-housestaffwithoutinfrared windowsorviewports.Thefollowingassump-tions are made:Total man-hours per inspection of inspec-table equipment: 331 hours (23 days)Staff electrician internal charge-out rate $125.00 per hourStaff thermographer assists with panel removal, etc (two-man task)PPE suit-ups twice per day, per man (30 minutes per man per suit-up)One man-hour per compartment panel for safe removal, etc. (x two for two-man team)147 individual panels to inspect (per Table 1)After the infrared windows were installed and there was no requirement to remove panels or wear increased levels of PPE, the task became aone-manjob.Theincreasedefficiencyand economiesofmotionandman-power,which infraredwindowsprovided,significantlyde-creased the time required to complete a survey tojusttwo,eight-hourdaysforatotalofjust 16 man-hours. The costs associated with an in-frared survey using the IR windows are detailed in Table 4.Comparedtothecostsoftraditionalinspec-tions(Table3),thepapermillnowsaves $39,375 per inspection cycle because of the ef-ficiencies they have gained through the use of infrared windows.Return On InvestmentTable5combinesthedatafromthe previoustablestoillustratetheROI for the paper mill based on the initial investment of the IR windows, the in-vestment in installation and the costs toperformsurveysusingthewin-dows,comparedwiththemillstra-ditionalcostsofusingtheirin-house team while not using any windows.Usinginfraredwindowsisshownin this example to pay dividends as early asmid-wayintothesecondinspectioncycle, yieldingalmost$18,000insavingswhichcan be put back into the budget by the end of the second cycle. In just five inspection cycles the mill shows a savings of over $135,000. Moreover, because inspections can be complet-ed with greater ease and without increased risk to personnel, plant and processes, the frequen-cyofinspectioncycleshasbeenincreasedto quarterly,reflectingbest-practicesrecommen-dations which were previously not feasible, and thoughttobeunattainable.Thenewinspec-tioncyclebringsROItotheplantinjustone quarter, while reducing the risk of catastrophic failureamongtheplantscriticalpowerdistri-butionsystems,whichwill,inturn,minimize production losses due to equipment failure.Future InstallationsAdditionalwindowinstallationshavebeen planned and scheduled to occur during the fa-cilitys next shutdown. Because the customers in-houseelectriciansweretrainedtoinstall infraredwindows,theinstallationcostsfor IR Windows Suppy & Installation Investment197 Infrared Windows $42,050Installation Costs for 197 Units $18,910Total Assemblies $60,960Table 2 - Total CostsTotal Cost of Traditional Inspection with In-House Team Hours CostTraditional Inspection Time (Hrs x 2 per team)294 $36,750PPE Suit-up Time (0.5 Hrs x 2 per day x 2 per team)37 $4,625Total Cost $41,375Table 3 - Costs for Traditional Infrared SurveysTotal Cost of Inspection with IR WindowsHours CostInspection Time16 $2,000PPE Suit-up Time0 $0.00Total Cost $2,000Table 4 - Costs for Infrared Surveys Using IR WindowsFigure 1 - Installation of IR WindowFigure 2 - Traditional inspection using PPEUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 28 11/14/08 2:43:42 PMwww.uptimemagazine.com 27future installations will be a frac-tion of the cost paid for the origi-nal installation, saving even more moneyandacceleratingtheROI for additional windows. ConclusionThismillrealizedareturnon investmentveryquicklywhile benefitting from the other intan-giblesofinfraredwindows.Spe-cific achievements are:The ability to inspect the previously un-inspectable equipment The ability to inspect critical applications more frequently The ability to more aggressively monitor any applications which are suspected to be running to failureIncrease in safety for personnelDecrease in risk to plant assets and op-erations due to non-invasive nature of inspection safeguarding profitabilityFreeing up critical personnel who can be utilized for other valuable jobs in the plant rather than removing and reinstalling panelsAportionofthefinancialsavingswereused tocontinuetobuildandstrengthenthePdM ProgramthroughthepurchaseofasecondIR cameraforthemaintenanceelectricians,fur-therunderscoringthemillscommitmentto practicaluseoftechnologytoensureuptime while enhancing the safety of its workers.Infra-red windows provide a cost-effective and safer alternative to traditional inspections. Martin Robinson, I Eng,MInstD, is a highly sought after trainer and speaker for top-ics including infrared windows and general thermography, electrical preventative main-tenance, condition based monitoring, green energy, and electrical safety standards.With over 15 years of practi-cal field experience, Martins expertise is also valued on various committees, such as the British Institute for Non-Destructive Testing - InfraRed Training Working Group (which for establishes the training standards and working prac-tices for Thermographers in the UK).In 1997, he founded Global Mainte-nance Technologies, which provides Condition Monitoring, and energy management services to some of the most recognizable and presti-gious landmarks, organizations and businesses in London and Southeast England.Martin also formed IRISS, Inc, which produces the worlds only industrial-grade infrared windows capable of passing durability and impact requirements, the worlds first ultrasound ports; emissiv-ity standardization landmarking tags, and the worlds only transmissive PDU panels; and other groundbreaking solutions released continually.Residing in Sarasota, FL, Martin is a devoted husband and the proud father of 8.He can be contacted at m.robinson@iriss.comReturn on Investment (ROI) Windows Traditional ROI197 IR WIndows $42,050 - -$42,050IR Window Installation $18,910 - -$60,960Cost of First Inspection Cycle $2,000 $41,375 -21,585Cost of Second Inspection Cycle $2,000 $41,375 $17,790Cost of Third Inspection Cycle $2,000 $41,375 $57,165Cost of Fourth Inspection Cycle $2,000 $41,375 $96,540Cost of Fifth Inspection Cycle $2,000 $41,375 $135,915Total Cost for 5 Cycles $70,960 $206,875 $135,915Table 5 - Return on Investment Calculations(running total in far right column)THE ULTRASOUND APPROACHThis is one technology conference you cant afford to miss!Visit UESystems.com for presenter information or call 800.223.1325 today.Taking place at the Hilton Clearwater Resortin Clearwater Beach, Florida fromJanuary 18th to January 21st, 2009Youll learn how to:s )NCREASEPROlTABILITYs $ECREASEYOURCARBONFOOTPRINTs 5SE5LTRASOUNDTOQUICKLYANDACCURATELYDIAGNOSEFAULTYEQUIPMENTIntroducingA new CMMS/EAM software package that gives companies a complete and accurate maintenance picture.Our software helps you stay competitive by identifying where time and money is being lost and where you should focus your eforts in order to maximize operations ef ciency and minimize maintenance costs.This allows you to focus on delivering customer satisfaction.Contact us today at 312.863.6500 for more information or to schedule a demo.www.cmmsdatagroup.com312.863.6500info@CMMSdatagroup.comUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 29 11/14/08 5:32:41 PMdecember/january 2009Building A Lubrication ProgramBy Using the Five Rights, You Wont Go Wrongby Ray Thibault, CLS, OMA I & II his article will examine the use of the five rights of lubrication - which are Right Type, Right Quality, Right Amount, Right Place and Right Time - all of which are important in the development of a highly effective lu-brication program.Many companies fail to realize the importance of lubrication and the application of these five basic concepts to achieve world class machinery reliability.Each will be examined in detail, along with a summary of best practices, including procedures in the selection of the optimal lubricant supplier.Right Type Asafirststepinthelubricationofequipment,refer totheOEMmanual.TheOEMshouldbecontactedif there are any questions.With old equipment the OEM manual may be outdated and better lubricants may be available.Whenindoubt,utilizeyourlubricantsup-plier along with the OEM. Twomajorclassesoflubricantsareoilandgrease. Theselectionofthetypeisbasedontheapplication. Greases are used extensively in the lubrication of small bearings.Asaruleofthumbuseoilwherepossible because it can be cooled and filtered but this is not pos-sible for many applications where grease is the better choice.The following are applications for grease: To decrease drippage and splattering, as the grease acts as an additional seal to reduce leakage To reach hard to get to lubrication points where lubrication frequency is important and when oil circulation is impractical To seal in the lubricant and assist in sealing out contaminants such as water, dirt and damaging corrosives To protect metal surfaces from rust & corrosion To lubricate machines with intermittent operation To suspend solid additives such as moly or graphite To lubricate sealed-for-life applications When extreme or special operat- ing conditions exist When machine parts are badly worn When noise reduction is important Greasesarecomposedmainlyofoil dispersed in a thickener with additives. Typical grease is about 85% oil.It is the oil which does thelubricatingingrease.TheNLGIclassifiesgreases according to consistency with the following grades in-creasinginhardness:000,00,0,1,2,3,4,5,and6. ThemostcommonNLGIgradeis#2.Athighspeeds #3maybeusedandatlowtemperaturesandincen-tralized systems a 0 or 1 is used. Most large equipment is oil lubricated and selection of therighttypeiscriticaltoreliability.Twomajorfac-tors in selection of an oil based lubricant are the correct viscosityandadditivesintheformulation.Foramore completediscussionofviscositypleaserefertoBasic Principles of Viscosity and Proper Selection Techniques publishedinLubrication&FluidPower(LFP).Fora more complete discussion of additive types, please re-fer to All Lubricants are not Created Equally (Basic Con-cepts in Formulation of Finished Lubricants) which was published in LFP in 2006. OEMs will recommend the correct ISO viscosity grade fortheirequipmentbasedontheoperatingtempera-ture. Table 1 classifies kinematic oil viscosity in centi-stokes for industrial lubricants based on the ISO grade which is the midpoint of a viscosity range +/- 10%.lubricationuploadT28ISO VGMid Point Limits, KV 40CISO VGMid Point Limits, KV 40 CKV 40C,mm2s-1Min. Max.KV 40C,mm2s-1Min. Max.ISO VG 2 2.2 1.98 2.4 ISO VG 100 100 90 110ISO VG 3 3.2 2.88 3.52 ISO VG 150 150 135 165ISO VG 5 4.6 4.14 5.06 ISO VG 220 220 198 242ISO VG 7 6.8 6.12 7.48 ISO VG 320 320 288 352ISO VG 10 10 9 11 ISO VG 460 460 414 506ISO VG 15 15 13.5 16.5 ISO VG 680 680 612 748ISO VG 22 22 19.8 24.2 ISO VG 1000 1000 900 1100ISO VG 32 32 28.8 35.2 ISO VG 1500 1500 1350 1650ISO VG 46 46 41.4 50.6 ISO VG 2200 2200 1980 2420Table 1 - Kinematic Oil Viscosity in CentistokesUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 30 11/14/08 3:22:34 PM Sincegreaseisprimarilyoilwhichdoesthe lubricating;thecorrectviscositymustbe selectedinthegreaseformulation.Table2 providesguidelinesontheselectionofthe correct viscosity in grease.Oncethecorrectviscosityhasbeendeter-mined,thecorrectlubricanttypebasedon additivecompositionneedstobeselected. Lubricantformulationsconsistofabase stockandadditives.Mostbasestocksare mineral oils from refining of crude oil.Table 3summarizeslubricantcompositioninvari-ous lubricant types.Lubricants in Table 3 with o signify the addi-tive is not in all formulations but is optional for specific applications. Right Quality Once the right type of lubricant has been se-lected, it is important to select a high quality lubricant.Qualityisboththeabilityofthe lubricanttomeetOEMspecificationsbased on performance on ASTM tests and the clean-liness of the fluid which is delivered.You can havethehighestqualitylubricant,butifis not handled properly during delivery or stor-age it will not perform as expected. Product data sheets provide useful in-formationonlubricantsandtheirbe-havioronASTMtestswhichprovides informationontheirperformanceon equipment.Thebesttestforalubri-cantishowithasperformedinyour plant,buttherearesomesituations wherealubricantisselectedonlyon specification tests.A series of articles waspublishedin2005inLFPontur-bine,hydraulic,andgearoilspecification tests.Pleaserefertothesearticlesforan in-depthcoverageoflubricantspecification tests and how they can help in the selection of the right quality lubricant. Thefollowingsummaryisbestpracticesto apply in maximizing lubricant quality: Utilize specification tests on product data sheets to compare lubricants Contact OEMs for minimum specifica- tion requirements Set minimum lubricant specifications with suppliers Set standards on new lubricant deliver- ies but be reasonable.During the delivery process it is difficult to main- tain high levels of cleanliness. Most hydraulic oils need to filtered before use Utilize certificates of analysis for water content and viscosity on delivered lubricants Routinely run more extensive tests with an oil analysis laboratory to determine if supplier ismeeting minimum requirements Dont utilize price as main criteria in supplier selection Establish return criteria in lubricant contracts Right Amount Grease Lubrication More is not better.Too muchlubricantinasys-temcanbeasdestruc-tiveasnotenough,as evidencedbytheover greasingofelectricmo-tors,whichhappensto be a major failure mode. Theuseoftheformula inFigure1willassistin greasing rolling element bearingswiththecor-rect amount. www.uptimemagazine.com29 Thiscalculationwillgiveyouthenumber ofouncestoaddtoabearingduringgreas-ing.This is especially important when greas-ing electric motors because of the tendency toovergrease.Inordertoaddthecorrect amount,greasegunsneedtobecalibrated on their delivery of number of shots /ounce. Thiscanbecompletedbyusingapostage scale to weigh out one ounce of grease.An easiermethodistocountthenumberof shotstofilla35mmfilmcanister,which is approximately one ounce of grease.Once the guns have been calibrated, try to use the samegreaseguntypeconsistentlyforthe sameapplication.Someofthenewerguns will indicate the amount being added. Oil Lubrication Centralized oil systems add the right amount at the right time.This dis-cussionwillfocusonthehavingthecorrect levelinoilbathsandsplashlubricatedgear boxes. Many small pumps are lubricated by oil baths asillustratedinFigure2.Thecorrectlevel for a bottle oiler bath should be at the mid-dle of the lowest ball.ISO Viscocity ApplicationISO 100 and LowerHigh speeds > 3600 rpm and low loads such as electric motorsISO 150/220 Moderate speeds !VC TechncIcies is swilLly becominq Lhe leader in PdM and advanced indusLrial diaqnosLics.As a pioneer in PredicLive MainLenance and hiqhLech services, lVC presenLs iLs Lechnoloqies in Lhe lorms ol rouLebased condiLion moniLorinq services, leld LroubleshooLinq and repair assiqnmenLs, commissioninq, and various lorms ol mulLichannel daLa acquisiLion Lo include analysis ol various machinery and process orienLed problems LhaL plaque indusLries.We are lookinq lor capable and independenL individuals Lo |oin our Leam ol successlul AnalysLs.HlXc`\[ZXe[`[Xk\jj\e[i\jld\1ZXi\\i7`mZk\Z_efcf^`\j%ZfdfiZXcc/''%,),%()-01 it may be as small as 0.87 or as large as 1, so as a rough rule of thumb, the MTTF is roughly equal to h.You need to know the beta values to get the correct medicine because everyone will tell you things wear out, although, unfor-tunately,wekillmorethingsthaneverlive long enough to wear out.(Note: On another website2,Dr.RobertAbernethyprovidesad-ditionalinsightintothedifferencesbetween MTBF and MTTF.Consulting his website may be important for students of the Weibull method.)MIL-HDBK-338onpage46givesyoua simpleandcleardefinitionoffailure: The event, or inoperable state, in which any item or part of an item does not, or would not, perform as previously speci-fied.Reliability (lack of failures) always terminates in a failure (loss of the func-tion when you needed it).Many other detailsaboutfailuresarealsoincluded in pages 46-47.Finally,downloadthetechnicalpaper #2 from Paul Barringers website at the bottom of the page called:Where Is My DataForMakingReliabilityImprove-ments.It gives other source documents andshowshowtomakethecalcula-tions.Consider Feedback from an Asset Management Expert Severalcommentswerealsoobtainedfrom JohnS.Mitchell,aself-describedadvocate of change whose Asset Management Hand-book(ISBN0-971-7945-1-0)islistedinour essential library3.John believes a meaningful comparisonofMTBFmustconsidertheser-vice.Some, because of the fluid and/or oper-ating conditions, will have shorter life expec-tancies than others.Mitchell uses the analogy of a coal miner who smokes; the miner prob-ably has a shorter lifetime than a non-smoker office worker. JohnMitchellhasbeentrying--withoutsuc-cess so far -- to find a parameter that will, with one number, describe the distribution around anaverage.Distributionaroundanaverage might be the percentage or number of the to-tal population more than 20% below the aver-ageMTBF.Asanexample,supposeaplant reports an MTBF of 48 months.This would be showing performance a bit below best in class in Table 1, from Pump Users Handbook: Life Extension (ISBN 0-88173-517-5), but doesnt say much beyond that.Knowing also that 2% of the total population was below 36 months would be useful information because it would tellusthattheplantwasawareofcertain pumps that failed more often than others.(In manyrefineriesthatnumberissomewhere between7and10percent).However,sup-poseonefoundoutthattheMTBFof25%- 30% of the population was below 36 months, ourdiagnosismightbequitedifferentand the opportunities for improvement would be shifting to a new focus. More Experience-based Advice You Can Use TodayThe explanations offered by Paul Barringer and John Mitchell will have to be weighed by seri-ous reliability professionals.Some of their sug-gestions were certainly considered in the mid-1970s when we wrote about calculating pump MTBF based on actual operating time.Yet, in-dustry soon decided that the numbers looked betterwhenthecalculationencompassedall installed pumps, irrespective of running or not running.Moreover, we have always advocated pickingfirsttheripe,low-hangingfruitand hasten to note that not everyone has heeded this advice.We are where we are and the pic-tureisnotrosy.Repeatfailuresaboundand continue to be tolerated.Repeat failures are warning signs; they are the inevitable precur-sorstoextremefailureswhichveryoftenkill people.To this day, we see CMMS (computer-ized Maintenance Management Systems) soft-ware that allows log entries in words such as bearing replaced.To be of use to devotees ofequipmentuptime,asystemmustrecog-nizethataccuratefailureanalysisisrequired for failure avoidance.The entries must prop-erly identify why a bearing failed and diligent failure analysis is absolutely necessary.Failure avoidance should be the ultimate goal because it means asset preservation and curtailment of money wasted on repeat repairs, not to men-tioncostlyremedialactionafteranextreme failure.All too often, persistent repeat failures are evidence of seriously flawed reasoning.Theengineeringstudentemployedasanin-tern at that refinery probably would not wish tolosetheopportunityforeasytrackingof pump failures.He was probably searching for answers to tasks assigned to him by oth-ers.We can only speculate that persons unknown are often looking for ways to burytheunacceptableperfo