When responding to Damo's comments above, it's important to remember that this is a platform for sharing knowledge, and his expertise may lie in a different subject. It's impossible for anyone to know everything. Let's all remember to be respectful and open-minded in future discussions.
I humbly apologize and retract my previous statement.
Damo, there's no need to stress, mate. While I agree with Just's stance, Josh is a seasoned member of the forum and likely has a resilient attitude. He's been known to make valid points and can handle criticism. I believe he'll be fine. Cheers!
Josh, before implementing Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM), it is essential to lay the groundwork for success. This includes 1. having metrics and measurements of pre-RCM performance, such as MTBF of key equipment groups, trips, HSE incidents, costs, and system availabilities. 1b. Prepare your team for the changes RCM will bring by implementing proper Change Management practices. Effective communication with relevant staff members before, during, and after the analysis phase is crucial.
2. Ensure alignment with your CMMS system by using standard intervals as defaults during the RCM process. It is important to utilize the same resource titles and ensure the CMMS has a 'shutdown work' option.
3. Gain support from management by delivering presentations for approval and endorsement, appointing an Implementation team with a leader chosen by management, reporting progress periodically, and securing Sponsor support to address implementation challenges.
4. After implementation, measure and report results using the same metrics as the pre-RCM study. Monitor changes at 6m, 12m, and 24m intervals and publicize results, whether good or bad. These steps may be basic, but they are essential to meeting the minimum requirements for successful RCM implementation.
- 07-09-2024
- Victor Thompson
Another point to consider is the abundance of new routine maintenance preventive tasks that can be generated through the RCM process. It is crucial to approach this realistically, as some plants end up with an overwhelming number of tasks that surpass their manpower capacity. Additionally, it is important to prepare for the transition period when implementing these new tasks alongside existing firefighting duties. Without proper planning and resources, the routine work may end up taking a backseat to urgent tasks, resulting in the potential benefits of RCM being lost. It's essential to strategize effectively to ensure that all maintenance tasks are completed efficiently.
Hello Josh, I recommend the following steps to ensure the success of your improvement program:
1. Secure leadership support to lead the improvement efforts effectively.
2. Conduct a benchmarking exercise to evaluate your current metrics.
3. Evaluate the existing organizational culture to determine its readiness for change or the ability to adapt.
4. Provide training for your team on the new methodology.
5. Establish key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure progress.
6. Choose appropriate tools and techniques for the implementation of Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM).
7. Implement the RCM outputs effectively.
8. Follow up regularly and communicate progress.
9. Celebrate the achievements of your team! Cheers, Gary
Thank you for the valuable comments provided. Vee, I would appreciate some clarification on certain points. Firstly, when you mention "same resource titles", what exactly are you referring to in terms of resources? Secondly, could you provide insight into the ideal composition of the implementation team? Should it include maintenance and operations department personnel under the guidance of an experienced RCM specialist? Additionally, could you offer examples to demonstrate the statement: "RCM will necessitate modifications to work practices and content"? How specifically would work practices be altered? It is evident that the content of work may vary significantly given that the approach would be focused on failure modes rather than relying solely on OEM recommendations.
Hey Damo, no need to apologize or retract anything as Richard mentioned. You're welcome to join in and I challenge you to surpass my 3000 comments. Many of my comments revolve around topics I'm curious about, especially related to reliability. Participating in this forum is a hobby of mine, and I'm currently revisiting the issue of RCM implementation. Although we initially considered RCM before deciding against it, I can't stop thinking about it. While it's touted as essential for risk reduction, many implementations have failed. It's interesting how there are conflicting opinions - some claim that over 90% of RCM implementations fail, yet there are resources like "RCM Implementation Made Simple" out there. Why is there such discrepancy? Some even cut corners in the RCM process to ensure success, even though it may not reduce risks to ALARP levels. On the other hand, there seems to be less controversy surrounding other risk reduction techniques like RBI and IPF, which are considered more straightforward.
In response to your questions, I have provided the following insights:
2b) When referring to "same resource titles," are we discussing various types of resources? For example, crafts in fields such as Mechanical, Electrical, Instrumentation, Scaffolding, and Insulation, or equipment for lifting such as Cranes, etc.
3b) The ideal composition of the implementation team would consist of employees from both the maintenance and operations departments, with leadership from an experienced RCM specialist. However, it is crucial to have individuals with project execution skills. While some knowledge of operations and maintenance is beneficial, it is not mandatory.
1b) To better understand the statement "RCM will require us to change the work practices as well as content," let's consider some examples. Following RCM implementation, the use of CBM applications will noticeably increase. It is essential to improve the quality of history and downtime recording, while setting priorities more rigorously. Work practices may need to shift towards focusing on failure modes rather than OEM recommendations. Initially, operations may be reluctant to embrace a run-to-failure strategy or may have concerns when intervals change from 6 months to 12 months.
- 07-09-2024
- Shawn Thompson
Josh, in my opinion, there seems to be less controversy surrounding RBI and IPF compared to other risk reduction techniques. This could be due to the fact that these processes are perceived as more straightforward and not as complex. However, the lack of debates may not be attributed to the reasons you mentioned.
For instance, RBI is not as widely utilized as it could be due to many countries still adhering to prescriptive legislation-driven inspections. It has taken around 30 years for RCM to become widely known, so RBI and IPF are still relatively new concepts. On the other hand, IPF is mainly implemented during the design phase, with Regulators often requiring demonstration of ALARP before approving new projects. Engineering design companies and consultants tend to comply with these requirements promptly.
It is important to note that SAE JA 1011/1012 outlines the key components of an RCM process, but it is not considered a standard itself. Similarly, API RP 580 is a recommended practice rather than a mandatory standard, leaving room for interpretation and variation. Some processes claiming to follow RCM principles may only select certain elements that align with their interests, resulting in a diluted version of the approach. This can lead customers to believe they are receiving a comprehensive RCM analysis at a fraction of the cost, which highlights the importance of understanding the true value of these methodologies.
RBI comes in three main forms - Qualitative, Quantitative, and Semi-Quantitative. Providers have the flexibility to choose which parts of API RP 580 to incorporate, as it is only a recommended practice. These points will be further explored in the upcoming edition of my book "Effective Maintenance Management," scheduled for release in mid-2011.
- 07-09-2024
- Yvonne Mitchell
I now understand your reference to resource titles. It aligns with what I consider resources, such as Manpower, Materials, Equipment, and Tools (MMET). When selecting project team members, it makes sense to have representation from departments like Maintenance and Operations. Are you suggesting the formation of a dedicated project team with external members, particularly RCM specialists and individuals from Operations and Maintenance departments? Typically, how many team members would be necessary? Following RCM implementation, there will be a focus on Condition-Based Maintenance (CBM). Some may doubt its effectiveness in identifying equipment issues initially. However, historical data and downtime records can easily be managed in a Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS). In my experience, work prioritization is comprehensive, including a priority 5 for shutdown tasks.
I am aware that RBI involves both qualitative and quantitative components, either separately or in combination.
Josh, I want to clarify that I am not suggesting a standalone project team. I am emphasizing the importance of having a team with the necessary skills for a successful RCM implementation. Each RCM project is a unique endeavor with defined timelines and budgets. While it is beneficial to have RCM specialists and staff from operations and maintenance departments involved, company staff with project management skills can also handle the tasks effectively. Although RCM knowledge is not essential, having expertise in planning and CMMS can be advantageous. Including members from operations and maintenance is encouraged, but having a small team is sufficient. The workload will determine the number of team members needed, and part-time staff can also be considered.