I am looking to benchmark our Key Performance Indicators (KPI's) with other Condition Monitoring Groups. We focus on comparing the failure rates of plant items that are monitored by Condition Monitoring (CM) against those that are replaced proactively (such as for oil leaks or low insulation resistance), as well as those that are replaced following CM group alerts for bearing or other faults. Another key target involves analyzing the decrease in downtime on CM monitored conveyor gearboxes, couplings, and pulleys as a result of our CM program. Are these standard metrics or are there any alternative approaches worth considering? Thank you.
While I don't consider myself an expert on condition-based monitoring (CBM), I would like to continue the conversation by posing some questions. Are you monitoring the following aspects in your CBM program: 1) comparison of manhours dedicated to CBM activities versus other maintenance activities 2) quantity of equipment included in the CM program, such as rotating, static, electrical, and instrument loops 3) Mean Time Between Repair (MTBR) and Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) before and after implementing CBM 4) expertise of CBM personnel 5) annual maintenance costs of equipment before and after CBM implementation 6) breadth of your CBM program, including activities like vibration analysis, oil analysis, thermography, and noise detection 7) utilization of a CMMS or work order system for planning and scheduling CBM tasks. Thank you.
Those are all important KPIs, but remember variety is key to a comprehensive overview. Consider including metrics that reflect efficiency of preventative maintenance, like Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) and Mean Time To Repair (MTTR), in your benchmark. They can provide insights on the program's impact on general equipment reliability and repair speed. Another KPI worth looking at is the Planned Maintenance vs. Emergency Maintenance ratio. This could speak volumes about the effectiveness of your CM program in predicting and preventing failures, thereby reducing the instances of emergency fixes. Just some food for thought.
Your approach seems thoroughly aligned with standard KPIs for condition monitoring, with a strong focus on failure rates and downtime reduction. However, consider integrating cost-effectiveness metrics such as "Cost Saving Ratio (CSR)" which measures the savings obtained from using CM activities as opposed to dealing with catastrophic failures. Additionally, "Return on Investment (ROI)" for your CM program could add another useful dimension to your benchmarks. Including such financial metrics can help you paint a more complete picture for your company's stakeholders.
✅ Work Order Management
✅ Asset Tracking
✅ Preventive Maintenance
✅ Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: Answer: Common KPIs for benchmarking CM groups include comparing failure rates of monitored plant items, analyzing downtime reduction on monitored equipment, and evaluating the effectiveness of proactive replacements based on CM alerts.
Answer: Answer: To compare failure rates, you can track the performance of monitored equipment against items that are replaced proactively based on issues like oil leaks or low insulation resistance, as well as those replaced after receiving CM alerts for faults like bearing problems.
Answer: Answer: Analyzing downtime reduction on monitored equipment helps assess the impact and efficiency of the CM program in minimizing disruptions and improving overall operational reliability.
Answer: Answer: Yes, alternative approaches worth considering may include evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the CM program, assessing the accuracy of fault detection methods, or exploring predictive maintenance strategies to further optimize asset performance and reliability.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.