Is it Asset--Problem--Cause, or, Asset--Component--CompProblem--Cause?

Is it Asset--Problem--Cause, or, Asset--Component--CompProblem--Cause?

Scenario: This is a critical asset. Per RCM Analysis it has a suggested maintenance strategy (but not RTF).

Is the Asset Problem Code really that useful other than saying it is not working? Odds are, the Maintenance Technician is going to zero in on a failed component. But it is not clear where that is entered. If you enter the Component in the Cause code, well, there could be a lot of components in that choice list. [Related Topics: Duplicate WO Warning; Asset Criteria definition; sub-assets and rotables]

Some would say, the component that failed wasn't really the cause of the failure, meaning this failure was possibly due to a human factor. And where do you record that? [Related Topic: all books by Winston Ledet on Defect Elimination]

Many stop building out their failure code hierarchy right there at the Cause code level because this design issue has never been solved. The o.o.b. WO screen is missing some fields. And now the reliability engineer has no validated data. Of course he can rifle through the narratives but that sort of defeats the purpose behind failure data.

Entering validated failure data is certainly more challenging than just saying job is done, or describing in narrative what was discovered. The trick is to assign input responsibilities at job completion as follows:

1) Technician performs component repair or replace.

2) Technician enters failed component in validated component field.

3) Technician enters component problem code

4) Technician OR Maint Engr OR Reliability Engineer enters cause code. And perhaps this is only required on (asset) criticality above a certain value.

The lesson learned here is that there is a FAILED COMPONENT and a CAUSE CODE -- two different things. And yes this is hard to capture but if not properly captured and analyzed you are doomed to repeat, sensors or not.

Narender Kumar

Chartered Engineer MIMechE, CAMA2, CRE, CMRP

6 å¹´

Dear John, completely agree with you. It is the responsibility of the requester to go in depth of every problem & then raise a work order. Afterall requester SHOULD be first Maintainer.

赞
回复
Paul Seccombe

Helping StartUps & ScaleUps in the Energy Industry

6 å¹´

John Reeve Definitely the latter - but we at Predikto (www.Predikto.com) look at the problem holistically - our customers give us the problems they want to Solve/find (needles in a haystack very often) and the data associated with those assets, the previous failures, maintenance history, etc (all and any data available) and by building out those data into cloud-based Predictive asset models we can tell you which asset the specific problem and the attributing causes - and WHEN the failure will occur...thats Industry Leading capablitiy!

赞
回复
Carlos Viloria

Equipment Reliability Technician

6 å¹´

This is why I prefer to see code catalogs that only account for component/symptom/mechanism, not touching failure cause (root cause). Doing that we avoid two major pitfalls: blaming people and analysis paralysis. If you want your failure notifications and work orders created with minimum delays, it's better to leave the human factors out of the failure coding notation. At risk of incurring in generalization, failures are always caused by human factors (which take time to identify) and are manifested in components (which we must identify swiftly through the CMMS/EAM).

要查看或添加评论,请登录

John Reeve的更多文章

  • Company, Community, Country, Planet

    Company, Community, Country, Planet

    "It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." // Deming Asset management can be…

    4 条评论
  • Failure Reporting and Failure Analysis

    Failure Reporting and Failure Analysis

    The Asset Manager Has Questions for His Senior Staff What if the Data is Bad? Bad data can be due to poor processes…

    4 条评论
  • Advanced Processes are the Backbone of HRO

    Advanced Processes are the Backbone of HRO

    Webinar Link: https://www.uptimeai.

    3 条评论
  • The Problem with Weekly Maintenance Scheduling

    The Problem with Weekly Maintenance Scheduling

    Most organizations agree that weekly scheduling is an industry best practice. That said, most organizations do not have…

    7 条评论
  • Establish a Reliability-Centric Asset Management System

    Establish a Reliability-Centric Asset Management System

    5 Steps to Operational Excellence The goal of a reliability-based, asset management system is to enhance operational…

    6 条评论
  • The Significance of Chronic Failure Analysis using a Bad Actor Report

    The Significance of Chronic Failure Analysis using a Bad Actor Report

    Synonyms for chronic: recurring, repeating, persistent, lingering, routine, sustained Chronic failure analysis is a…

    4 条评论
  • Do You Have a Defective CMMS System?

    Do You Have a Defective CMMS System?

    Ideally, a CMMS is seen as a critical business system, which means the system is used to optimize ROA, enhance craft…

    3 条评论
  • Is the CMMS Really Too Hard to Use?

    Is the CMMS Really Too Hard to Use?

    Status Quo Fewer than 5% of all companies establish an asset management framework that truly integrates maintenance…

    13 条评论
  • Project Scheduling Requirements for Asset Management

    Project Scheduling Requirements for Asset Management

    How are Asset Management and Project Management Related? The CMMS toolkit includes work breakdown structures and work…

    8 条评论
  • Strategic Roles Are Essential for Continuous Improvement

    Strategic Roles Are Essential for Continuous Improvement

    Background How Can Organizations Add Efficiency and Grow Faster Than the Competition? Any organization that wants to…

    7 条评论

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了