Critical Equipment Analysis diagram

I am trying to implement RCM in my organization and one of the first steps to acomplish this goal is to determine my critical equipment list.

I undestand that, there is a standard form or logic diagram that can be used as a tool to categorize my equipment.

Is there? , How often do we review it ?
Original Post
i am reviewing your graph, thanks by the way, i don't know if you are skillfull in reading in spanish but here's a fragment of a logic a little simpler than yours, but it would be interesting to know how do you compare. It'something that i came across searching the web.

This is a spreadsheet that is based on logic formulas, it returns the value as a true or false critic eq.

You'll find two sheets, in the second one, it's the flow used to calculate.

For anyone who wants to check it out , i'd like to know if it's suitable like it is, or it can be improved.

Attachments

Files (1)
i noticed that there have been a few downloads of my partial spreadsheet.

I'd like to ask, can anyone see if it can be improved in any way?

Is there something that i am not considering?
At the end, can i trust that the return value is truly determinning a CR-EQ ?
Franck,

To get it right the Equipment Criticality Assessment (ECA) needs to be a collaborative effort between the concerned parties and certainly obtaining buy in from the responsible group for the machinery. The group should include, in my mind, operations, maintenance, engineering, etc. Management must certainly support, fund and endorse the outcome of the analysis. Your are right, the ECA cannot be a one-man show.
Franck,
Mviz is right. The team should also include the storeroom people to determine availability of support parts. The formula can become quite confusing. Allied Reliability has a program to assist in this project and can partisipate as much or as little as you require. Also Allied can provide you with the training and tools to accomplish the implimentaion of your program with the least aggravation and error. You can contract Bill Keeter at 843-414-5763 or keeterb@alliedreliability.com for further info.
I'm currently performing a criticality analysis of the equipment at my plant. We are also using this effort to determine what materials associated with each piece of equipment should be a part of our critical spares list.

We set up our matrix based on the four RCM criteria of Environmental Effect, Health and Safety Risk, Economic Cost, and Operational Effect and gave each criteria a specific weighting value.

When evaluating a piece of equipment, we then assigned a severity level for each criteria from 0 (No Impact) to 4 (Critical Impact). We also took into account the amount of time it would require to order and receive a replacement item. The criticality rating is a value between 0 and 100, with a rating greater than 75 being a critical item.

After completing the initial analysis, we hold a roundtable discussion with mechanical, electrical, and operational staff to sanity check our findings agree upon a final criticality.

We hope to leverage the results into a more comprehensive RCM project later on down the road.
after counting hour of reunions and meetings, we were able to come out with a procedure, based on ISO Norm and we pulled put a new diagram that you might find it usefull.

The interesting feature about this flow, is that it not only gives you a Critic Equipment or not, but it resolves a Critic A class , Critic B class and classifies Critic C class as a non critic equipment.

Attachments

Files (1)
We got several thousands of different type of equiopment at the plant and we have only a limited resources to manage our assets.

To enable us to respond whenever an equipment is in distress, w e need a means to make a distinction which equipment are critical and non-critical.

This classification has a significant impact not only in our PM/Pdm activities but also on the way we handle our spare parts.

The key here is the risk matrix and the HaZop. We have several categories for our consequence (production loss, safety/environmental impact, etc) and we hhave also establish several degrees of probabilities.
quote:
production loss, safety/environmental impact, etc)


AS FOR THE PRODUCTION LOSS , WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT AN EQUIPMENT WILL BE CONSIDERED CRITICAL IF ITS FAILURE AFECTS AT LEAST 5% OF THE PRODUCTION.

ALSO A DEFAULT CONDITION WOULD BE IF THE EQUIPMENT HAS A BACKUP THAT MAINTAINS PRODUCTION CAPABILITY, THEN IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS NON CRITICAL.
Mike,

This is a great tool. In fact, I'm planning to use it.
Question : how do you rate the number based on the low, med, high rank?
In other words, how do you know if 210 (per the attached example) is high rank?

Please advise, thanks!

quote:
Originally posted by Mviz:
Franck,

In conjunction with the Equipment Criticality Flow Chart we also utilize the following:

Mike
Asset criticality is a form of evaluation in which assets are evaluated on the basis the impact a failure of this equipment presents. The factors depend upon the type of the Industry for example in the Food Industry one can use the following
This impact is considered for: Safety (personal), Environment, Product Quality, Food safety and cost to operate.

If the equipment fails, what impact will the failure have on... (Safety, Environment, etc.)


And as Mviz said this is a group effort


Each of these factors can have sub categories which can be given different weightage

For example

Safety Impact can have following sub categories

1. Critical Safety Equipment
Equipment has no critical Device 0
Equipment is equipped with critical safety Device 30
Equipment is a critical safety Device 50

2. Injury Potential
None 0
Potential for Minor injury 10
Potential for Moderate injury 20
Potential for Serious injury / Death 30



3. Fire / Explosion Potential
None 0
Low Potential 10
Moderate Potential 20
High Potential 30



4. Loss Potential
No Potential Loss 0
Potential for Minor Loss 10
Potential for Moderate Loss 20
Potential for Serious Loss 30



From all this we will get Safety Rank

Similarly we can make sub categories for other factors like Environment, Product Quality, Food safety and cost to operate and assign them some weightage and we can get the overall ranking for each asset.

It is important to start this assessment with the right mix of people
• Select a team of 4 - 6 participants who will understand the facility(s) being evaluated from all of the relevant perspectives: Safety, Environmental, Food Safety, Customer Service, and Operations.
• Each participant must ensure that the perspective they represent is heard and considered in the group discussion.
• The group must come to a consensus on each item. If this is not possible at first, skip the item and come back to it later rather than spend a lot of time on it.
• The group will determine individual “field” definitions. Remember the assessment ranks criticality of a particular facility. The key is consistency throughout one evaluation.
• Realize that the first 5 to 10 pieces of equipment will require the most time. After that, work will progress much more quickly.
Most of the criticality classifications seem to have 3 or 4 categories. I would like to understand, how may assets in each category have permanent instrumentation and how many assets are monitored using data collectors. If you use data collectors, does the frequency of collection vary with criticality.

It would be interesting to compare the monitoring practices in each industry.
Reference to the CAR diagram...Frank, could you please tell about the outcome of the CAR rating?... what do you further do once you have evaluated the CAR rating of an equipement?\

e.g For 210 (as in example) what is the criticality High, Medium or Low and what should I do for the safety of such critical equipment?

Add Reply

×
×
×
×