Chicken and egg 27 August 2014

Plant and equipment condition monitoring systems are invaluable in any maintenance engineer's armoury. But you might need to get the basics and backup right first, suggests Brian Tinham

Too many people in both operations and maintenance seem to believe they can solve their machinery reliability problems simply by investing in appropriate condition monitoring technologies. These lead to predictive maintenance – timely interventions based directly on hard evidence – goes the argument, and the result is greatly reduced unplanned downtime. There's no disputing the logic. However, the fact remains that, if you don't also implement a best practice maintenance and continuous improvement (CI) regime, your shiny new monitoring system may only reveal the premature deterioration you already knew was a problem. Yes, it will do so before it's too late, but, no, it will not delay its onset.

To TPM (total productive maintenance) and RCM (reliability centred maintenance) advocates, this is basic stuff. There is no chicken and egg conundrum here, they say. Educate and train machine minders in the gentle art of autonomous maintenance (AM) – carrying out basic inspection and maintenance routines themselves – and, all else being equal, any deterioration will then be at predictable and longer-term rates. No one suggests that condition monitoring isn't a sensible precaution: these days, techniques such as thermal imaging, vibration monitoring, acoustic wave sensing and oil analysis, are neither expensive nor technically challenging. They just shouldn't form your first line defence.

As Simon Carr, general manager for diversified industries at CI consultancy Industry Forum, puts it: "If a shaft that's key to a critical machine is suffering forced deterioration, because it's not being cleaned or cared for properly, then predictive techniques simply highlight that deterioration. Implement good standards for operations and maintenance – with AM techniques, for example – and you can eliminate that aspect. Only then does it make sense to go for condition monitoring, where you need it."

For him, this is all about seeing maintenance as an integrated part of the continuous improvement whole, with the JIPM (Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance) version of TPM at its core. Why that particular approach? "Because it identifies the sequence of steps you must follow to move from pilot project to, ultimately, how the organisation will do business," he explains. "And it does so with accountabilities and structures that fit into eight 'pillars', each of which closely resembles everyday business leadership."

Examining those pillars makes sense, too, with the first four instilling what Carr describes as operations and maintenance stability. First is focused improvement, which harnesses methodologies ranging from lean thinking, including Kaizen, to Six Sigma. Second is AM, with everyone operating at a higher level and thus contributing to mitigating obvious failure modes.

The third is planned maintenance (PM), but with the emphasis on engineers and technicians restoring equipment to its original condition, while also building in systems to improve the efficiency of ongoing care and CI. This is the area concerned with defining machine criticality – and hence the levels and types of condition monitoring equipment (fixed installation or hand held), so that deterioration can be tracked and breakdowns avoided.

Then the fourth pillar is training and education, essentially to cement the first three in place. "Everyone will have been through a learning curve by then," observes Carr. "So this is about ensuring a structured approach to developing people so that appropriate AM to the right standard becomes part of their daily activities."

With those under your belt – typically, a six- to nine-month project – you're into the next four pillars, which are centred on management, quality, the office and finally safety, health and environment. But critical throughout this journey is that this brand of TPM encourages, indeed depends upon, cross-functional teams that span not only plant and factory disciplines but also layers of management. The point: people who operate machinery and equipment are best equipped to know when something is awry, but senior management pull the levers of power – so positive transformation can only happen quickly and sustainably where everyone is involved and buys in.

So much for the TPM pillars: however, given that most sites aren't likely to start from zero, what should you do? Duncan Maxwell, operations manager at reliability and engineering services consultancy PEME, suggests examining your current maintenance performance. That's not just in terms of crude failure rates (unplanned events) or machinery condition, but also operator engagement, the factory or plant culture and (just as important) management's attitude – and, in particular, whether maintenance and engineering are seen as part of CI. Thereafter, it's about selecting the change management technique that feels most appropriate.

Maxwell makes the point that, when it comes to transforming maintenance, there is no one size fits all. "It's similar to condition monitoring, where vibration analysis isn't the answer for everything. You have to define your requirements and that includes understanding the value of performing PM tasks – are they justifiable against the desired goal. For example, you won't want to invest in an RCM programme for a £200 pump."

With that as the background, he suggests that TPM can be implemented fairly quickly, leading to rapid plant uptime benefits, whereas pure RCM is going to involve a longer timeframe and some intense remedial activity, underpinned by serious data collection. "RCM is more directed to the engineering function, but TPM can be rolled out more simply for everyone," he summarises, adding that PEME itself prefers a halfway house involving "first-line RCM principles" for task justification, but with execution simplified for operators and technicians. Either way, says Maxwell, the end results should be comparable.

As for condition monitoring, he believes you should reckon to spend as much money on training and education as you do on the equipment itself. "Otherwise you're likely to get inappropriate recommendations, such as expensive pumps needing to be replaced because of their vibration frequencies, when the equipment in trouble is the shaft next door." And he adds that, while oil analysis, vibration monitoring, thermal imaging and the rest are valuable tools, you still need to understand the plant failure modes to determine which techniques to use – and how frequently.

"If you establish that a failure mode may take three months from identifying a problem to breakdown, then maybe monthly visits with a portable condition monitoring system make sense. That would be significantly cheaper than an all-singling, all-dancing fixed system and it could cover a whole bunch of plant assets."

Before closing on this subject, though, it's worth remembering the potential influence of vested interest in any advice. Dr Steve Lacey, engineering manager at bearings and engineering services specialist Schaeffler, believes that condition monitoring can and should be central to preventing unplanned downtime and driving CI. "One of the big benefits of condition monitoring is that, with the right training and experience, you can not only keep critical processes going and stop disasters, but also understand your processes better and move to make improvements."

Where that notion falls down, however, is when resources aren't forthcoming to maximise the dividend. "People think they can just turn the key on condition monitoring and the world will be a wonderful place. But you need additional resources to understand the data and act on what you find – perhaps to improve the design of the equipment itself but also the efficiency and uptime of the whole process."

The bottom line: this is not necessarily about choosing one approach over another. It's about which data sources and methodologies your people are likely to find most convincing. And whether or not resources will be made available to turn information into action.

Brian Tinham

This material is protected by MA Business copyright
See Terms and Conditions.
One-off usage is permitted but bulk copying is not.
For multiple copies contact the sales team.