Failure Reporting, Analysis, Corrective Action System
-
Upload
ricky-smith-cmrp -
Category
Technology
-
view
2.581 -
download
6
description
Transcript of Failure Reporting, Analysis, Corrective Action System
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Failure Reporting, Analysis, Corrective Action System
Presented by: Ricky Smith, CMRP
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
What is FRACAS?
• A Failure Reporting, Analysis, and Corrective Action System (FRACAS) – Process by which failures can be reported in a timely manner – Analyzed so that a Corrective Action System can be put in place
and eliminate or mitigate the recurrence of a failure.
• The goal of FRACAS – Help an organization better understand failures – The reporting required to identify failures – Actions required to eliminate or mitigate failures
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
What is FRACAS?
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Maintenance’s Objective
“Mitigate Failures with an effective Maintenance Strategy” - Preventive Maintenance (quantitative inspection, restoration,
replace, replenish, etc.) - Condition Monitoring (ID of a Failure early enough a failure
can be mitigated) also known as PdM - Run-to-Failure
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
PF Curve Priority 5 Priority 4
Priority 2 Priority 1
Ultrasonic Energy Detected
Vibration Analysis Fault Detection Oil Analysis
Detected
Audible Noise
Hot to Touch
Mechanically Loose
Ancillary Damage
Failure Initiated
Cond
ition
PRECISION PREDICTIVE PREVENTIVE RUN TO FAILURE
Time
Catastrophic Failure
P-F Curve Eq
uipm
ent C
ondi
tion
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Proactive Maintenance
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
FRACAS? Issues?
“A Proactive Reliability Process is a supply chain. If a step in the process is skipped, or performed at a substandard level, the process creates defects known as Failures.
The output of a healthy reliability process is optimal asset reliability at optimal cost.”
― Ron Thomas, former Reliability Director at
Dofasco Steel, Hamilton, ON
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Causes of Failures • No repeatable procedures • Not executing PM to specification • Not performing Corrective Maintenance to specification • Personnel not trained (skills, maintenance, reliability) • Parts not stored to specifications • Not using the right tools • Best Lubrication Practices unknown • RCA is not applied or not known • No auditing of Maintenance Activity or Work
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Known Best Practice Data
• 15% of Maintenance Work is Execution of PM • 15% is the results of the PM Execution
PM / PdM is a controlled Experiment
• 15% of Maintenance is Execution of PdM • 35% is the results of PdM • Emergency Work – Less than 2% • Planned Work – 90% • Scheduled Compliance – 80% (by day by week)
Copyright 2009 GPAllied© Source: John Moubray, Nolan & Heap
Failure Patterns
Time Time
Age Related = 11% Random = 89%
Bathtub Pattern A = 4%
Wear Out Pattern B = 2%
Fatigue Pattern C = 5%
Initial Break-in period Pattern D = 7%
Random Pattern E = 14%
Infant Mortality Pattern F = 68%
“Why is infant mortality so high?” Maybe because we do not apply the PF Curve Philosophy?
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
PF Curve with Priorities Identify defect, Plan and Schedule Work Zone
100% R
eactive Work
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Work Priority Distribution
Priority 1 and 2 Work is Reactive Priority 3, 4, and 5 Work is Proactive
PM PdM CPM CPdM REQ
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
PF Curve and Managing Proactive Maintenance
Point P
Point F
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Work Priority Distribution – a Few Simple Rules
EMERGENT work is anything that is done as a Priority 1 or 2
CORRECTIVE work is anything done as a result of an inspection
CORRECTIVE work should never be done as a P1 or P2
ROUTINE work is anything done as a PRIORITY 3
CORRECTIVE work can be done as Priority 3
CORRECTIVE work should be done as a Priority 4 and 5
Most CORRECTIVE work should be done as P4 or P5 if you embrace P-F mentality
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
FRACAS Enables Success of an Organization
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
“It isn’t what you know that will kill you, it is what you don’t know that will”
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
It is all about the Data
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
How do you know where are? How do you know the Direction to reach you objective.?
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Without good data we are lost!
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
“Bad Data” resulting in High Variation
- Variation in your Maintenance Process
- PM Program not effective - Variation in PM Compliance - PM program not focused on specific Failure Modes - Repeatable Corrective Maintenance Procedures not
available or if available not used - Storeroom is a deathtrap for parts, little or no PM
program on critical spares
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Definition of Data Quality – ISO 14224
Must have Confidence in the collected Reliability and Maintenance data, and hence any analysis, is strongly dependent on the quality of the data collected. High-quality data is characterized by: a) completeness of data in relation to specification; b) compliance with definitions of reliability parameters, data types and formats; c) accurate input, transfer, handling and storage of data (manually or electronic); d) sufficient population and adequate surveillance period to give statistical confidence;
e) relevance to the data users need.
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
The International Standard for Failure Data
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Failure Data – ISO 14224
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
ISO 14224 Maintenance Taxonomy Standard
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
ISO 14224 Maintenance Taxonomy Applied
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Effects of Good Data Quality
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
KPI #1 – Asset Health Report
Asset Health Metric - The percent of assets with no identifiable “Defect”
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
KPI #2 – Mean Time Between Failure
• Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) is the average length of operating time between failures for an asset or component. (Definition extracted from Published SMRP Metrics)
• MTBF is used primarily for repairable assets and components of similar type. (Definition extracted from Published SMRP Metrics)
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
KPI #2 - MTBF Example / Reporting by Taxonomy
Equipment Taxonomy (ISO 14224) Systematic classification of equipment into generic groups based on factors possibly common to several of the items
Area Level MTBF Component Level MTBF
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
KPI #3 – MTBF / “Equipment Condition Report”
Asset Health Metric - The percent of assets with no identifiable “Defect”
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
KPI #4 – “Equipment Condition Report / Equipment Detail”
Asset Health Metric - The percent of assets with no identifiable “Defect”
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
KPI #5 – Route Compliance
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Route Compliance Impact on Asset Health Report
Asset Health Metric - The percent of assets with no identifiable “Defect”
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
KPI #6 – Monthly Maintenance Cost % of RAV
• Maintenance Cost - Labor Cost - Material Cost - Contract Maintenance Cost - Overtime Cost
• Correlate Cost to Other KPIs
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Data Accuracy Requirements
• Process Map • Roles and Responsibilities Identified
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
The 7 Steps to a Successful FRACAS
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Step 1 – Determine your end goal.
• The beginning of every journey starts with a destination • The beginning of the journey to an effective FRACAS is the same as
any other • You must have an end goal in mind • The goal of a FRACAS is not to gather data, but to eliminate failures
from the organization • Knowing this helps ensure that every policy, procedure, and activity in
the system is goal oriented • The roles, goals, and responsibilities of everyone involved with the
system can be focused toward that goal • Having the goal in mind allows you to build the shared vision and
values that will make the system work successfully for you
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Step 2 – Create the Data Collection Plan
1. Determine the measures you will use – MTBF
Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) is the average length of operating time between failures for an asset or component. MTBF is used primarily for repairable assets and components of similar type.
– MTTF Mean Time to Failure (MTTF) is the average length of operating time to failure of a non-repairable asset or component, i.e., light bulbs, rocket engines. A related term, Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF), is the average length of operating time between failures for an asset or component. Both terms are a measure of asset reliability and are also known as Mean Life.
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Continued
2. Determine what data needs to be collected to create the desired measures
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Continued
3. Determine how the data will be collected - There are different types of data that need to be collected - Determine how the data will be collected - Failure data can be collected through the EAM/CMMS, automated process
data systems, or by using checklists
4. Determine how data will be analyzed
– The best bet is probably to start with Pareto – Just make sure to remember that data analysis - where to apply methods
JDI, RCA and RCM – Do not fall victim to analysis paralysis. Analytical reports are nice, but no
statistic ever solved a problem
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Keep it simple in the beginning
3rd
2nd
1st # of Failure by area
# of Failures by Equipment
# of Failure by Component or Part
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Examples – Dominant Failure Pattern
MTBF – Object Type
(Electric Motor)
Cause Code =
# LOL = 5% # MAERR = 10%
# LOP = 20% # OPER = 65%
Failure Pattern
Cause Code =
# LOL # MAERR
#LOP # OPER
New Failure Pattern
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Example Continues
• % of Assets with No Identifiable Defect
• Failure Rate for Specific Components
Drive Belt-Broken-Ageing Failure Rate
0 602.49 1205 1807.5 2410 3012.5 3614.9 4217.4 4819.9 5422.4 6024.9
Time
0
0.00010696
0.00021393
0.00032089
0.00042785
0.00053481
0.00064178
0.00074874
0.0008557
0.00096266
0.0010696
Failu
re Ra
te
Regionalised rate
Distribution rate
P0: 0%
B20: 3492
B15: 3208
B10: 2858
ε: 0.05664
ρ: 0.9781
γ: 0
β: 3.745
η: 5212
Median rank
2-parameterWeibull
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Step 3 – Determine Organizational Roles, Goals, and Responsibilities (RACI)
• Who collects the data? • Who analyzes the data? • Who takes what action based on analysis results?
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Develop Process Map / Maps
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Develop a RACI Chart for each Process Map Decisions/ Functions
Maint. Manager
Maint. Supervisor
Reliability Engineer
Maint. Planner
Maint. Tech
Failure Data Entry I A C I R Data Accuracy A R C C C RCA – Invalid Data I A R C R Analysis of Data A I R C C Actions Identified A C R I C Actions Taken A R C C I FRACAS Activated A R C C I
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Step 4 – Create the FRACAS Policies and Procedures Manual
• Policies and Procedures Manual that will serve as the basis for managing and administering the FRACAS system
• This is a tedious step, but should not be skipped • This Manual will serve as the basis for developing:
– Initial FRACAS Training for all key personnel – Ensuring that new employees understand and participate in
FRACAS effectively – Best to develop a FRACAS Management Manual and a pocket
size book that is easy for people to carry around and refer to as required
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
What should be in the Manual?
• Let’s develop this together to insure we both agree on the content • The manual should have at the minimum
– Definition of FRACAS – Benefits of FRACAS – Managements’ Guidance – Managements’ Expectations – Roles and Responsibilities by position – FRACAS reports – Key data which must be input to generate these reports – What these reports will do for the mine – Training Outline for each person based on RACI Charts
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Step 5 – Develop FRACAS Training Plan
• Each person in the organization will need to be trained according to their level of participation in the FRACAS
• Use the Tasks Listed on all RACI Charts
Decision Function
Maint. Manager
Maint. Supervisor
Reliability Specialist
Maint. Planner
Maint. Tech
Failure Data Entry
Data Accuracy
RCA – Invalid Data
Analysis of Data
Actions Taken
FRACAS Activated
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Training Plan Requirements
- Training Plan should consist of the following Position : Maintenance Technician Task: Close out a Work Order Condition: Given 5 Completed Emergency Work Orders Standard: Close out Work Orders to 100% Compliance Method of Training: Lecture, Web, Reading, etc. Method of Validation: Written Test, Web Test, Verbal Recall, etc.
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Step 6 – Implement FRACAS
• Let’s turn it on – Publish FRACAS Policies and Procedures Manual – Train required personnel – Hold required informational meetings – Begin data collection on highest priority area – Analyze data and report results on Public FRACAS Information
Board – Create corrective actions based on results.
• Mitigation of Human Error • Changes to the current maintenance strategy • Changes to how production operates equipment • Resign Equipment
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Step 7 – Monitor, Show Success, and Adjust
• Monitor data quality and results
Decision Function
Maint. Manager
Maint. Supervisor
Reliability Specialist
Maint. Planner
Maint. Tech
Failure Data Entry I A C C R
Data Accuracy A R C C I
RCA – Invalid Data A C R I C
Analysis of Data A I R C I
Actions Taken A R C R I
FRACAS Activated A R R C I
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Monitor and Adjust
• Good data is the backbone of good decision making • It is important to monitor data quality • Make adjustments to either the data collection plan or the training
program • Insure data is consistent and informative • Many organizations believe they have good data only to find out
their data collection is inconsistent
Copyright 2009 GPAllied©
Questions?