Training Path Recommendation

The recommended path of training from IRISS for sites looking to start up a CBM or Reliability Based Maintenance program using Ultrasound or Infrared Devices is based off of years of experience of providing training for companies around the World. Many time companies have told us they want to start off with getting their entire staff trained on how to use one of these technologies and other times they want small classes to teach only a couple of individuals and from personal experience I can tell you that the best approach is to start small. 

This is why the First Step for the site is to have their Mechanics or Engineers receive an Equipment, Phone APP or Software Orientations training prior to using the new technology. These short classes give the user the ability to understand the basics on how everything works rather than throwing the kit at them and expecting them to start using a new technology that day. One major consideration should be the adaptability of the inexperienced user to using new technologies. My old benchmark was to ask the students in my classes to hold up their phones. If they were still using an old flip phone, they were probably not very receptive to new technologies and as such they might struggle with using software tools that come with these types of devices.

The Second Step for Training would be for an on-site 2-3 Day training class which would allow the user to have an instructor onsite to go out with the device and use the software to gain a better understanding of how it all works together to make a diagnosis of fault conditions. For example, I once was requested to teach at a site that wanted two 2 ? Day training sessions on Ultrasound devices. These classes are typically designed for 10-20 students. So, I was in shock when I arrived and was told that they wanted ten, 4-hour training sessions with 20 students per session totaling 200 students for the week. They wanted everyone on site trained so they could collect the data and sound waves with the device. I lobbied hard with my point of contact letting them know that it was not effective to train 200 people on how to use their ultrasound device, historical database software and the sound analysis software. I had a couple of the supervisors also lobbying to make it a smaller class, but we were overruled.

 After the week of training had been completed, I again mentioned that I felt that the training was ineffective as there had not been enough time for the students to learn all of the material they should have had to properly run the program. I was told by my contact for the site that he would be doing all the route loading, downloading, and analysis so they only needed to know how to collect the data and sound waves, as he did not find any value in having the operators know what they were listening for.

 Several months later I received a phone call from the site. It was my point of contact, and he was heated. He was getting readings from the field of 121 and 0 decibels. He did not know why or what was causing this issue. I informed him that this was caused by having too much or too little amplitude coming into the device. I asked him what the data collectors were hearing when they were in the field. Their answer to that question, still leaves me shaking my head. They stated “I don’t have them using the headphones! I do not need them to listen to the bearings. I only need them to collect the data and sound waves for me to analyze them in the office!” I informed him that this was part of the problem and that they need to make sure the glorified data collectors were watching the number of bars of amplitude to ensure they were not collecting too much or too little amplitude which in turn would eliminate these default values he was seeing. 

 They then informed me that the people doing the collection were using an advanced screen which did not allow them to see the amplitude the device was receiving. I let them know that this was a major issue with how the data and sound wave collection was being performed and that the other 6 sites with their company were having no trouble at all since their sites only put 10 people in for the full 2?  days of training instead of 4 hours of training a piece for 200 students. 

The Third Step would be to pick out some key people who have shown a higher level of interest and proficiency in using these technologies and have them take a Certification Course. This would allow the program to have someone on site to do the initial analysis on the findings. To finish the story of the example site, they eventually let the individual who started the program off on the wrong path be moved out of control of the program at this site and the 2 supervisors who rallied to my side at the first training sessions take over the program. The program quickly went on to having a dedicated team at the main site that would travel around to the outlaying sites to do the more advanced Ultrasound, IR and other Pd/M & CBM technology testing. This would later afford them recognition in the reliability landscape for Program of the Year and shows why it is so important to follow the path of progression for training outlined in this article.

  The Fourth Step is the one that every site or company should ensure that they have in place within 2 years of starting up a full-fledged CBM Analysis Program and that is to have least one to two CAT 2 Analyst available for guidance for those using the technology, review analysis of the CAT 1 Analyst and make the diagnosis of the condition of the assets in question. This individual could also oversee and supervise the training of new personnel up to a CAT 1 level.

The Fifth Step is the final level of training we recommend and that is a CAT 3 CBM Analyst. Currently we are not providing this level of training as in the past this level was regulated to usually being provided by only a few companies without any real direction or guidance when it came to the agenda for these technologies. Many of the Level 3 that are out there were internally certified or were certified under the old ASNT standards which is now surpassed by ASNI/ASNT CP-105 & CP-189 standard or the ISO 18436 standards for the different technologies. This level is generally reserved for those that will over see multiple sites for a company and they can train personnel up to a CAT 2 level. This individual will have an extensive background in that technology and are generally regarded in their fields as an SME (Subject Matter Expert) due to their years in the field.

 In conclusion, it is important that any program looking to bring in a new technology or newer version of a device they operate, ensure that the right candidates not only be able to use such devices but be around long enough to become proficient at using them. Training is great, but constant usage and support from management are even more important. Often this is overlooked when things get lean as typically these programs are discarded to focus on fighting fires instead of staying the course and getting to the point that the unscheduled downtime reflects the abilities of the programs. Too often we also see new management come into play who have little to no experience with these technologies or lack of belief in the program and as such it all goes by the wayside. This is why it is so important to show the ROI of the cost for equipment and training by sharing the findings and great saves that avoid an unscheduled or catastrophic downtime.

For more information, please contact me on LinkedIn or email me at [email protected] and I will be glad to discuss our options for getting your program up and running.