Search Blogs
News, Events and Information about Reliability Centered Maintenance and RCM Blitz.
One sure sign that you're getting old is when you look at a change in technology and say "I don't get it!"
This is how I am with Webinars.
I have been thinking about doing some RCM Blitz Webinars. In the past I have both participated in and instructed Webinars and I have to be honest and say in both cases I thought it was a truly awful way to present and learn materials.
In each case there were glitches in getting everyone up and running so the material could be presented, viewed, and heard. Questions were clumsy; we tried asking questions by voice and by typing in questions and comments. It just didn't seem natural. And being honest it did not fit my style of learning or instructing. In my mind if you wanted to teach someone how to fall asleep this might be a world-class methodology!
Over the past decade I have spent a fair amount of time trying to ensure that all of my courses cover the different styles of learning; reading, listening, doing and testing. In my mind learning is a process that is alive, exciting and interactive. It is a process that can take place in a classroom or in the field but it is most effective when the student and instructor work face to face instead of screen to screen.
So today for a moment I sit back and wonder if time might be passing by. Is the Webinar the way we will learn in the future?
Will we someday all attend web-based conferences and type in messages about what we learned in a webinar and how it helped us to make significant changes to our company and how we run our business? I was thinking while watching a bit of reality TV last night that I could even record a bunch of Webinars on all kinds of stuff and schedule them until the year 2060. I'll be 100 on September 16th of that year but because I'm going to record them this year I'll still sound young. I also wondered if maybe CBS had already done this to Andy Rooney years ago and never told us that we have just been watching a Webinar of Andy the last five years or so.
What I really want to know is what makes the Webinar relevant?
Why do people like Webinars?
How can I make a Webinar fun? (I am told my courses are fun and I enjoy teaching them. I want the feel the same way about Webinars!)
Last but not least, would you rather attend a Webinar or a live, in person training course?
I'm looking for some answers people and it's your time to be heard.
This is how I am with Webinars.
I have been thinking about doing some RCM Blitz Webinars. In the past I have both participated in and instructed Webinars and I have to be honest and say in both cases I thought it was a truly awful way to present and learn materials.
In each case there were glitches in getting everyone up and running so the material could be presented, viewed, and heard. Questions were clumsy; we tried asking questions by voice and by typing in questions and comments. It just didn't seem natural. And being honest it did not fit my style of learning or instructing. In my mind if you wanted to teach someone how to fall asleep this might be a world-class methodology!
Over the past decade I have spent a fair amount of time trying to ensure that all of my courses cover the different styles of learning; reading, listening, doing and testing. In my mind learning is a process that is alive, exciting and interactive. It is a process that can take place in a classroom or in the field but it is most effective when the student and instructor work face to face instead of screen to screen.
So today for a moment I sit back and wonder if time might be passing by. Is the Webinar the way we will learn in the future?
Will we someday all attend web-based conferences and type in messages about what we learned in a webinar and how it helped us to make significant changes to our company and how we run our business? I was thinking while watching a bit of reality TV last night that I could even record a bunch of Webinars on all kinds of stuff and schedule them until the year 2060. I'll be 100 on September 16th of that year but because I'm going to record them this year I'll still sound young. I also wondered if maybe CBS had already done this to Andy Rooney years ago and never told us that we have just been watching a Webinar of Andy the last five years or so.
What I really want to know is what makes the Webinar relevant?
Why do people like Webinars?
How can I make a Webinar fun? (I am told my courses are fun and I enjoy teaching them. I want the feel the same way about Webinars!)
Last but not least, would you rather attend a Webinar or a live, in person training course?
I'm looking for some answers people and it's your time to be heard.
Name: RCM Blitz
Session dates: 9/14/2010 - 9/16/2010
Duration: 3 Days
Session Fee: $1495
Location: Charleston, SC
Presenters: DougPlucknette
Description: This course teaches the fundamentals of Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM). This course focuses on preserving equipment functions by identifying appropriate Preventive Maintenance (PM) tasks, Predictive Maintenance (PdM) tasks, failure finding tasks and other actions that protect against failure or mitigate the consequences of failure. Examples and exercises give participants “hands on” experience to help them begin to master RCM concepts.
Who Should Attend: Maintenance Managers and Supervisors, Reliability and Maintenance Engineers, Maintenance Technicians, Production Managers, Supervisors, and Operators, Plant Engineers, and others involved in operating and maintaining of assets.
What You Will Learn: • The importance and history of RCM
• RCM terminology and fundamental RCM philosophies
• Identifying and allocating resources for a RCM program
• Preparing for an RCM analysis
• Techniques for prioritizing systems for analysis
• Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) for RCM
• How to evaluating failure consequences
• How to select PM, PdM and failure finding tasks and intervals
• What other function protective actions are available
• When Run-to-Failure (RTF) is appropriate
• Packaging and implementing RCM analysis results
• When to use a subject matter expert team
• Common barriers to implementation and how to get buy-in from all levels
Session dates: 9/14/2010 - 9/16/2010
Duration: 3 Days
Session Fee: $1495
Location: Charleston, SC
Presenters: DougPlucknette
Description: This course teaches the fundamentals of Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM). This course focuses on preserving equipment functions by identifying appropriate Preventive Maintenance (PM) tasks, Predictive Maintenance (PdM) tasks, failure finding tasks and other actions that protect against failure or mitigate the consequences of failure. Examples and exercises give participants “hands on” experience to help them begin to master RCM concepts.
Who Should Attend: Maintenance Managers and Supervisors, Reliability and Maintenance Engineers, Maintenance Technicians, Production Managers, Supervisors, and Operators, Plant Engineers, and others involved in operating and maintaining of assets.
What You Will Learn: • The importance and history of RCM
• RCM terminology and fundamental RCM philosophies
• Identifying and allocating resources for a RCM program
• Preparing for an RCM analysis
• Techniques for prioritizing systems for analysis
• Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) for RCM
• How to evaluating failure consequences
• How to select PM, PdM and failure finding tasks and intervals
• What other function protective actions are available
• When Run-to-Failure (RTF) is appropriate
• Packaging and implementing RCM analysis results
• When to use a subject matter expert team
• Common barriers to implementation and how to get buy-in from all levels
I work someplace different every week.
A different town, city, state, or country.
The people I work with usually speak a little differently than I do. They have a different accent and may even speak a different language.
The things we perform RCM Blitz™ on are different for nearly every company I work with. I have performed Reliability Centered Maintenance analysis on bottle fillers, dishwasher conveyors, chemical tanks, oil platform equipment, air compressors and barge unloaders. I can honestly say that while each one of these systems had several components or parts in common, each system and each result was different.
We have performed the exact same RCM analysis techniques for identical pieces of equipment at locations that were only 1500 miles apart and we discovered several different failure modes and several different mitigating tasks. While the equipment was identical, the locations as well as design and installation practices were very different and as a result the reliability of these two assets was very different.
With all of the differences I have listed, I still completely understand when a customer calls or makes the statement in the first day of training that "I'm not sure this will work for us....we are different."
I like to reply that I believe you’re different, so am I and so is the process you about to learn about. It works on everything and it depends on the knowledge, experience, and determination of your people and their desire to improve.
RCM Blitz™ is Different!
A different town, city, state, or country.
The people I work with usually speak a little differently than I do. They have a different accent and may even speak a different language.
The things we perform RCM Blitz™ on are different for nearly every company I work with. I have performed Reliability Centered Maintenance analysis on bottle fillers, dishwasher conveyors, chemical tanks, oil platform equipment, air compressors and barge unloaders. I can honestly say that while each one of these systems had several components or parts in common, each system and each result was different.
We have performed the exact same RCM analysis techniques for identical pieces of equipment at locations that were only 1500 miles apart and we discovered several different failure modes and several different mitigating tasks. While the equipment was identical, the locations as well as design and installation practices were very different and as a result the reliability of these two assets was very different.
With all of the differences I have listed, I still completely understand when a customer calls or makes the statement in the first day of training that "I'm not sure this will work for us....we are different."
I like to reply that I believe you’re different, so am I and so is the process you about to learn about. It works on everything and it depends on the knowledge, experience, and determination of your people and their desire to improve.
RCM Blitz™ is Different!
Redesign as a part of Reliability Centered Maintenance is often a field that gets a lot of attention. Some people would have you believe that the only way Reliability Centered Maintenance improves equipment reliability is through the identification and elimination of poorly designed equipment.
This could not be further than the truth!
When we look at the word Redesign in RCM terms it means any change in equipment, process or procedures so in reality most redesigns that come out of a RCM Blitz analysis are procedural. They address how we operate, set up and maintain our assets so when a RCM analysis is complete and the customer sees six pages of redesigns with 6 items listed on each page I tell them to relax and read the document as nearly 85% of all redesigns are procedural and cost very little to implement.
As an example I recently performed a RCM analysis on a box erector and the finished analysis identified 58 redesign tasks. Of those 58 tasks, fifty-two required a redesign or creation of a procedure of how to properly set the box erector up, how to smoothly transition from one size case to the next and how to maintain each set up over a period of time. Of the remaining 6 redesigns, five addressed a physical redesign to manufacture set-up blanks for each case size and the last was the addition of an additional photo eye to prevent a catastrophic crash of the erector shuttle.
The total cost to implement the 58 redesigns was less than $5,000.00 and tool less than two weeks time to complete. The newly implemented equipment maintenance plan improved the equipment OEE from 62% to 93% proving once again RCM Blitz delivers!
This could not be further than the truth!
When we look at the word Redesign in RCM terms it means any change in equipment, process or procedures so in reality most redesigns that come out of a RCM Blitz analysis are procedural. They address how we operate, set up and maintain our assets so when a RCM analysis is complete and the customer sees six pages of redesigns with 6 items listed on each page I tell them to relax and read the document as nearly 85% of all redesigns are procedural and cost very little to implement.
As an example I recently performed a RCM analysis on a box erector and the finished analysis identified 58 redesign tasks. Of those 58 tasks, fifty-two required a redesign or creation of a procedure of how to properly set the box erector up, how to smoothly transition from one size case to the next and how to maintain each set up over a period of time. Of the remaining 6 redesigns, five addressed a physical redesign to manufacture set-up blanks for each case size and the last was the addition of an additional photo eye to prevent a catastrophic crash of the erector shuttle.
The total cost to implement the 58 redesigns was less than $5,000.00 and tool less than two weeks time to complete. The newly implemented equipment maintenance plan improved the equipment OEE from 62% to 93% proving once again RCM Blitz delivers!
It was George Bernard Shaw and I think he was trying to express that young people have everything going for them physically; their minds should sharp and clear but because of their youth and inexperience they lack the patience and experience to make sound decisions. After a week of teaching the youth of Schlumberger at the Training Center in Sugar Land, Texas I have a different view than Mr. Shaw.
I think Old George would think differently if he had spent a week instructing young engineers from around the world on the process and benefits of Reliability Centered Maintenance. If I have said it once in the last 15 years I have said it one hundred times, Reliability Centered Maintenance at first glance doesn't seem like a difficult process but try once to facilitate an analysis and you will soon be lost in the subtle complexities of how to word a proper failure mode and the importance of good failure effect statements.
Looking at ten faces all under the age of 30 on a Monday morning I was staring into the bright young face of inexperience and impatience and wondering if they had the pluck required to conquer such a course.
Over the next several days I tested their patience and pushed the limits of what someone with 30 years experience would expect from someone with two and by Friday noon I was pleased to report that the youth of today are not what old George Bernard Shaw believed them to be. If anything is wasted today it's the time we don't spend as experienced professionals asking those with less what they think or believe caused a failure.
If youth is wasted on the young, could it be true that experience is wasted on the old? Experience after all can sometimes make us believe that we have tried everything we need to in order to improve. The youth my friends are willing to try those same things over again with more focus and precision.
If you have forgotten to include youth in your RCM effort, there is no time better than today!
I think Old George would think differently if he had spent a week instructing young engineers from around the world on the process and benefits of Reliability Centered Maintenance. If I have said it once in the last 15 years I have said it one hundred times, Reliability Centered Maintenance at first glance doesn't seem like a difficult process but try once to facilitate an analysis and you will soon be lost in the subtle complexities of how to word a proper failure mode and the importance of good failure effect statements.
Looking at ten faces all under the age of 30 on a Monday morning I was staring into the bright young face of inexperience and impatience and wondering if they had the pluck required to conquer such a course.
Over the next several days I tested their patience and pushed the limits of what someone with 30 years experience would expect from someone with two and by Friday noon I was pleased to report that the youth of today are not what old George Bernard Shaw believed them to be. If anything is wasted today it's the time we don't spend as experienced professionals asking those with less what they think or believe caused a failure.
If youth is wasted on the young, could it be true that experience is wasted on the old? Experience after all can sometimes make us believe that we have tried everything we need to in order to improve. The youth my friends are willing to try those same things over again with more focus and precision.
If you have forgotten to include youth in your RCM effort, there is no time better than today!
With the number of comments and responses to the two recent articles I posted on this event I could not help going back to books on Reliability Basics. One of my favorite books for reference is "Reliability Toolkit: Commercial Practices Edition" released by the Reliability Analysis Center out of Rome, NY. While the book was released in 1988 the section I reference has been available to the public since 1984.
It seems that nearly every day I read an article that refers to the failure of the BOP (Blowout Preventer) Valve, with all that has been written about the BOP Valve one would have to believe that this was a critical item in regard to this process. Keeping this in mind I pulled out my favorite old textbook and took a look at what the research funded our tax dollars recommended in regard to Critical Item Reliability. While I admit to being a bit of a geek, I found it quite interesting that we had a plan of recommendations in place to deal with critical items that dates back twenty-six years.
According to the Reliability Toolkit, a critical item is a component whose failure can significantly affect safety, operating success or repair costs. (I would guess that in today’s world we could add environmental impact to that statement) It goes on to say that "Critical items include high valued components, new technologies, limited life items, single source or custom components and single failure points where failure cause a total loss of operating capabilities.
Wow! I don't claim to have a vast knowledge of oil platform components but I would say that the above paragraph clearly describes the component we have been reading about the last four weeks.
Going back to the book, the next section lists criteria for "What Causes Critical Items"
1. Use of necessary advanced technology or processes
2. Marginal component capability in adverse conditions
3. Low part or product reliability
4. Failures that cause other components to fail
5. High cost custom designed parts
6. Limited or single source vendors for critical applications
7. Severe Safety and Environmental Impact
I don't know about you but I'm beginning to see some red flags here so I elect to read on to learn about "Critical Item Control Checklist". In this section we learn about major concerns and recommended actions. I would have to say that if I had a critical item in my design, I would want to take a close look at this check list.
The first major concern asks the question; "Has a failure mode analysis been considered for critical items?" The recommend action is to "Develop failure mode identification procedures so that control of the item can be invoked". That sounds a lot like Reliability Centered Maintenance to me!
Concern - Have compensating features been considered for the design?
Action - Consider features like safety margins, overstress testing or fault tolerance
Concern - Have reliability improvements been considered?
Action - Evaluate special stress tests, checkouts, vendor quality procedures, alternate components and operating duty cycles.
Concern - Does the operating environment strain or exceed design limits?
Action - Include fault tolerant designs, safety margins and external changes
Concern - Does failure of the item jeopardize safety or does a single point of failure disrupt mission performance?
Action - A list of critical items and personnel responsible for controlling and reviewing procedures must be established!
Let's just say that it has been an interesting afternoon of reading and affirmation; what I learned about reliability at RIT several years ago still applies nearly everything I do today. When it comes to reliability the tools and techniques made available by some very bright people are right at our finger tips. The experience and knowledge of the people who install, operate and maintain this equipment so often ignored hold the answers making sure events like these never happen to begin with.
I find it hard to believe that we were smart enough instruct people how to identify and address critical items in 1984 and in the year 2010 we quite simply were not smart enough to read and act.
It seems that nearly every day I read an article that refers to the failure of the BOP (Blowout Preventer) Valve, with all that has been written about the BOP Valve one would have to believe that this was a critical item in regard to this process. Keeping this in mind I pulled out my favorite old textbook and took a look at what the research funded our tax dollars recommended in regard to Critical Item Reliability. While I admit to being a bit of a geek, I found it quite interesting that we had a plan of recommendations in place to deal with critical items that dates back twenty-six years.
According to the Reliability Toolkit, a critical item is a component whose failure can significantly affect safety, operating success or repair costs. (I would guess that in today’s world we could add environmental impact to that statement) It goes on to say that "Critical items include high valued components, new technologies, limited life items, single source or custom components and single failure points where failure cause a total loss of operating capabilities.
Wow! I don't claim to have a vast knowledge of oil platform components but I would say that the above paragraph clearly describes the component we have been reading about the last four weeks.
Going back to the book, the next section lists criteria for "What Causes Critical Items"
1. Use of necessary advanced technology or processes
2. Marginal component capability in adverse conditions
3. Low part or product reliability
4. Failures that cause other components to fail
5. High cost custom designed parts
6. Limited or single source vendors for critical applications
7. Severe Safety and Environmental Impact
I don't know about you but I'm beginning to see some red flags here so I elect to read on to learn about "Critical Item Control Checklist". In this section we learn about major concerns and recommended actions. I would have to say that if I had a critical item in my design, I would want to take a close look at this check list.
The first major concern asks the question; "Has a failure mode analysis been considered for critical items?" The recommend action is to "Develop failure mode identification procedures so that control of the item can be invoked". That sounds a lot like Reliability Centered Maintenance to me!
Concern - Have compensating features been considered for the design?
Action - Consider features like safety margins, overstress testing or fault tolerance
Concern - Have reliability improvements been considered?
Action - Evaluate special stress tests, checkouts, vendor quality procedures, alternate components and operating duty cycles.
Concern - Does the operating environment strain or exceed design limits?
Action - Include fault tolerant designs, safety margins and external changes
Concern - Does failure of the item jeopardize safety or does a single point of failure disrupt mission performance?
Action - A list of critical items and personnel responsible for controlling and reviewing procedures must be established!
Let's just say that it has been an interesting afternoon of reading and affirmation; what I learned about reliability at RIT several years ago still applies nearly everything I do today. When it comes to reliability the tools and techniques made available by some very bright people are right at our finger tips. The experience and knowledge of the people who install, operate and maintain this equipment so often ignored hold the answers making sure events like these never happen to begin with.
I find it hard to believe that we were smart enough instruct people how to identify and address critical items in 1984 and in the year 2010 we quite simply were not smart enough to read and act.