In John Moubray's RCM2 book, page 302 emphasizes the importance of considering all functions, not just primary ones, when assessing maintenance effectiveness. Secondary functions, although seemingly trivial, can pose significant threats to an organization if overlooked. Therefore, when establishing maintenance effectiveness measures and targets, every function must be taken into account. On page 304, the book discusses how OEE only pertains to the primary function of an asset, neglecting the fact that assets, including machine tools, have multiple functions each with their own performance standards. This means that OEE does not provide a comprehensive view of overall effectiveness, focusing only on the primary function being fulfilled. As a practitioner of TPM for over a decade, I disagree with the idea that OEE is the primary measure of TPM. TPM activities ensure that both primary and secondary functions are addressed through pillars like Autonomous Maintenance and Planned Maintenance. By addressing secondary functions, TPM aims to achieve its OEE goal by reducing function loss and function reduction loss. In conclusion, while TPM has its own terminology for primary and secondary functions, the focus remains on optimizing equipment functions to achieve maximum effectiveness.
Rolly, I believe John's point is that OEE only measures the efficiency of the primary function of an asset. Even if the asset has a high OEE in its primary function, it may still have issues with its secondary functions. For example, a powder carton filling machine could be operating at 80% OEE, but if it is leaking powder, the secondary function OEE would be significantly lower. While TPM disciplines should ideally prevent such issues, John is trying to emphasize that this is more of a theoretical concept than a practical one. Thanks, Mike.
Apologies for the confusion - I was referring to the secondary function performance metric, not OEE. M.
In the realm of Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), the Key Performance Indicator (KPI) known as Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) focuses solely on the primary functions, as emphasized by industry experts like Mike. While TPM practitioners may inherently address secondary functions, these are not typically measured in the calculation of OEE. Some may question the necessity of measuring OEE if TPM practices already encompass primary functions. However, practical examples like utilizing air or water to cool hot pump bearings or collecting drips from a leaking mechanical seal in a drip tray can potentially enhance OEE. By proactively addressing issues like these, opportunities for minimizing production losses can be identified down the line. Observing such behaviors and reliability trends within a facility can provide valuable insights into operational efficiency and maintenance strategies.
Hey Vee, here's my advice: Measuring Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) without implementing Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) is ineffective and purposeless. However, if you calculate OEE with TPM in place, there is no need for debate as it helps address secondary issues. Based on your statement, it seems these plants focus solely on measuring OEE without implementing TPM practices. Just my two cents, Rolly Angeles.
In response to the question "Do you track OEE?" Tomo Harada from Toyota provided an insightful perspective. He emphasized that while OEE can be a useful tool for spot analysis, it may not always be the best management metric. Harada pointed out the limitations of OEE, noting that it can be misleading when used as a single performance indicator. He suggested that breaking down the components of OEE and tracking them individually is more advantageous to truly understand and improve efficiency in manufacturing processes. By doing so, organizations can avoid overlooking critical factors that could impact overall performance. This viewpoint offers a valuable perspective on the complexities of measuring operational effectiveness in production settings.
I completely agree with your perspective on TPM and OEE. Secondary function monitoring is often neglected, despite being critical for comprehensive maintenance effectiveness. Your point about TPM's pillars addressing these functions resonates with my personal experience in the industry as well. Focusing on both primary and secondary functions improves overall equipment efficiency, which is ultimately the core aim. It provides a more holistic view of an asset's performance and helps prevent unforeseen downtime or potential losses. Thank you for shedding light on this overlooked aspect.
✅ 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: Secondary functions, if overlooked, can pose significant threats to an organization. Therefore, it is crucial to consider all functions to ensure comprehensive maintenance effectiveness.
Answer: - Answer: OEE only pertains to the primary function of an asset, neglecting the fact that assets have multiple functions, each with their own performance standards. This limits OEE's ability to provide a comprehensive view of overall effectiveness.
Answer: - Answer: TPM activities, such as Autonomous Maintenance and Planned Maintenance, aim to address both primary and secondary functions to achieve the OEE goal by reducing function loss and function reduction loss.
Answer: - Answer: TPM, through its pillars like Autonomous Maintenance and Planned Maintenance, aims to optimize both primary and secondary functions of equipment to achieve maximum effectiveness.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.