Hello everyone, we are currently in the process of assessing and tracking MTBF, MTTR, and equipment availability in our SAP system. One major concern we have is determining the most effective method for calculating these key performance indicators. The primary issue lies in defining the "downtime" of equipment. Option 1 involves calculating downtime for any type of downtime, whether planned or unplanned, with the exception of Preventive MTC. On the other hand, Option 2 focuses on calculating downtime only for unplanned incidents, such as breakdowns, excluding any planned downtime. In my opinion, Option 1 appears to be the most accurate approach, but I welcome your input and valuable opinions on this matter. Thank you for your insights. Best regards. Keywords: MTBF, MTTR, equipment availability, SAP system, downtime calculation, preventive maintenance, planned downtime, unplanned downtime, breakdowns.
Hello Nadee, I'm a bit unclear on this. If the downtime is scheduled, wouldn't that fall under preventive maintenance? In our manufacturing facility, MTBF (mean time between failures) is calculated as the average time between one failure and the next occurrence on a specific item. This calculation is not affected by the actual duration of breakdowns. Thanks, Mike.
In a previous discussion, I highlighted the importance of considering all planned downtimes, such as scheduled overhauls, planned shutdowns, and run-to-failures, when calculating Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF). By incorporating these factors, which involve human intervention, into the calculation rather than solely focusing on unplanned downtimes like breakdowns, a more comprehensive and accurate picture of MTBF is obtained. Excluding planned downtimes, shutdowns, and run-to-failures may artificially inflate MTBF metrics, giving a false impression of reliability.
Hello Nadee, Let's take a moment to delve into the concept of MTBF, which stands for Mean Time Between Failures. It is calculated by dividing the total operating hours by the number of failures. A failure occurs when an item cannot meet its expected performance standards. It's important to note that planned replacements should not be considered failures since the item is still functioning as expected. However, replacements based on predictive maintenance (PdM) readings are considered failure events, as performance degradation has already begun. Breakdowns and rework are also classified as failure events. In reliability analysis, planned events are treated as "censoring" points where partial failure contributions are factored in. When conducting a reliability analysis, planned events and breakdowns are both included but treated differently. Consistency is key when analyzing MTBF. Stick to a method and definition that align with your reporting system. Use the corresponding downtime data to calculate MTTR, measuring downtime from stoppage to full capacity operation. Extracting accurate data from a Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) can be challenging. It's crucial to differentiate between preventative maintenance (PM), condition-based maintenance (CM), and breakdown maintenance (BM) events. Despite potential errors in data, consistency in computation method is essential. Consider how to use MTBF, MTTR, and Mean Time to Failure (MTTF) data, anticipate possible errors, and establish a clear definition of failure upfront. Decision-making is often not heavily influenced by exact MTBF or MTTF values, as long as consistency is maintained in the analysis.
Hi Nadee, I am involved in working with mobile plant operations. Our methodology sets us apart as we refer to it as "MTBS" (with the "S" standing for stoppages) instead of the traditional "MTBF". We are keen on identifying any factor that causes a machine to come to a halt and be unavailable for operations. Under this framework, we encompass all interruptions except for refueling, lubrication, and daily operator inspections. This encompasses Preventative Maintenance shutdowns, as well as both planned and unplanned stoppages of the machines. We also track MTTR to analyze how quickly we can resolve these stoppages. By applying Pareto analysis to these metrics, we can identify which machine systems are contributing the most to downtime. This allows us to allocate resources efficiently towards addressing issues – for example, excessive troubleshooting time for engine electrical system repairs may signal a need for additional training or investment in tools and facilities. Our belief is to encompass all factors affecting machine availability, as these directly impact the productive capacity of operations. This comprehensive approach enables us to fine-tune our reporting requirements to suit various needs. Kind regards, Matt.
Should we factor in time-based maintenance overhauls of rotating equipment when calculating Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)? These scheduled overhauls typically occur during planned shutdowns, involving the replacement of bearings and seals. These scheduled maintenance procedures are referred to as "reworks" in the RCM report of N&H. It is important to establish consistent trends based on your own definitions, but it can be beneficial to compare or benchmark against industry standards. For instance, I once heard of a pump in a refinery having an MTBF of up to 7 years. How did they achieve this without any shutdowns? Following standard definitions for MTBF can help in setting ambitious targets. A modern CMMS should have the capability to prompt users to document downtimes in relevant work orders, with the downtime field being a required entry. For example, for work orders categorized as BM, PM, or CP with Plant Maintenance Activity Type as Overhaul and/or system status as Shutdown, downtime should be recorded. Similarly, for CM work orders with activity type as Repair, downtime should be recorded if the system status is Shutdown, and not recorded if it is Running. When it comes to PM work orders with Plant Maintenance Activity Type related to testing and System status as shutdown, determining downtime in case of a failure can be challenging. In such cases, it may be recommended to input a minimal downtime of 1 hour to indicate a hidden failure. However, it is worth noting that not all CMMS platforms may include the Plant Maintenance Activity field.
I see where you're coming from with Option 1, as it includes a full picture of equipment downtime. However, there's value in differentiating between planned and unplanned downtime like in Option 2. This is because planned downtimes are mostly manageable and expected as part of the operations, and excluding them gives a more accurate representation of the reliability and availability of the systems. It's important to closely monitor unplanned incidents as these often indicate underlying problems that need addressing. Ultimately, I suggest incorporating both approaches. This way you'd get a comprehensive understanding of overall equipment downtime, while still being able to separately monitor incidents of unexpected failure.
Hello, I totally understand your struggle with this. I've been in a similar situation, and I found that Option 2, which only considers unplanned downtime, is more valuable for our operations. This is mainly because unplanned incidents are the ones causing the most disruption and financial impact. On the other hand, planned downtime like maintenance, upgrades, etc., are usually scheduled for low-impact times. However, this really depends on the specific scenario and the company's priority- whether you'd want to enhance overall efficiency or tackle unexpected production roadblocks. I'd suggest you identify your primary concern to choose an option that best suits you.
I believe that both options have their merits, but it ultimately comes down to the specifics of your operation. If the planned downtimes are a regular and significant part of your operations, Option 1 might indeed provide you with a more holistic and realistic picture of your equipment availability. On the other hand, if you're predominantly concerned with unexpected downtimes and their impact on productivity, then focusing on unplanned incidents as in Option 2 sounds reasonable. A hybrid approach might also be worth considering, where different weights could be assigned to planned and unplanned downtime in your calculations. This could give you a more nuanced view of your operational efficiency.
Hey there! I think your consideration of Option 1 makes a lot of sense, especially for a holistic view of equipment performance. Including all types of downtime can really paint a clearer picture of overall efficiency and help pinpoint areas that need improvement, especially when it comes to optimizing maintenance schedules. However, I also see the value in Option 2 if your focus is on minimizing unexpected breakdowns. Balancing both approaches could provide the best insights; perhaps tracking both types of downtime separately but using Option 1 for a more comprehensive analysis. Just a thought!
I think you've raised a great point about defining downtime! Option 1 might provide a fuller picture since it encompasses all types of downtime, offering a clearer understanding of overall equipment performance. This approach can highlight areas where improvements in preventive maintenance are needed as well. However, clarifying the purpose behind your KPIs might help too—if you’re aiming to minimize unplanned breakdowns specifically, then Option 2 could still be useful for targeted strategies. It really hinges on what you want to prioritize for your operations!
✅ 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: - MTBF stands for Mean Time Between Failures, MTTR stands for Mean Time To Repair, and equipment availability represents the percentage of time that a piece of equipment is available for use in a given period within the SAP system.
Answer: - Accurate downtime calculation is crucial for assessing and improving the performance of equipment, identifying areas for maintenance optimization, and enhancing overall operational efficiency in the SAP system.
Answer: - Option 1 includes all types of downtime (planned and unplanned) except for Preventive Maintenance, while Option 2 focuses only on unplanned incidents such as breakdowns, excluding planned downtime.
Answer: - The choice between Option 1 and Option 2 depends on specific operational requirements and goals. Option 1 may provide a more comprehensive view of downtime, while Option 2 offers a more focused analysis on unplanned incidents. It is advisable to consider factors like maintenance strategies and business objectives when selecting the most suitable approach.
Answer: - Preventive maintenance, if included
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.