Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Not exactly.

Plant reliability can be calculated based on downtimes and calendar time.

In your case of 30% manhours spent on PM and 70% manhours spent on CM, this means the plant is still very much in a reactive maintenance mode.

Instead of CM/PM ration, why don't you trend the manshours spent on PM and CM to see long term patterns?

Have the plants built up the initial PM program based on OEM recommended PM?

Did you include manhours spent on overhauls especially during shutdowns? These manhours can be big.
RM
quote:
Originally posted by Josh:
Not exactly.

Plant reliability can be calculated based on downtimes and calendar time.

In your case of 30% manhours spent on PM and 70% manhours spent on CM, this means the plant is still very much in a reactive maintenance mode.

Instead of CM/PM ration, why don't you trend the manshours spent on PM and CM to see long term patterns?

Have the plants built up the initial PM program based on OEM recommended PM?

Did you include manhours spent on overhauls especially during shutdowns? These manhours can be big.


Josh,

I know that my plant still in reactive culture and try to improve while all basic PM that OEM recommend are in place. Our plant running 16 yrs ago but why manhour spend only corrective work.

In practicle, I'm not sure how frequency calcuate CM/PM M-H ratio? I do that a month and data sources from routine maintenance only not count work during shutdown or outage.

I don't know how to start and motivate in my team???
RM
quote:
Originally posted by Josh:
Not exactly.

Plant reliability can be calculated based on downtimes and calendar time.

In your case of 30% manhours spent on PM and 70% manhours spent on CM, this means the plant is still very much in a reactive maintenance mode.

Instead of CM/PM ration, why don't you trend the manshours spent on PM and CM to see long term patterns?

Have the plants built up the initial PM program based on OEM recommended PM?

Did you include manhours spent on overhauls especially during shutdowns? These manhours can be big.


Josh,

I know that our culture still in reactive mode while basic PM (OEM recommend) are in place.

I do not count manhour spent during shutdown/outage period, only count during routinve maintenance and not sure how propoer frequency to calculate this KPI.
RM
@Registered Member posted:
quote:
Originally posted by Josh:
Not exactly.

Plant reliability can be calculated based on downtimes and calendar time.

In your case of 30% manhours spent on PM and 70% manhours spent on CM, this means the plant is still very much in a reactive maintenance mode.

Instead of CM/PM ration, why don't you trend the manshours spent on PM and CM to see long term patterns?

Have the plants built up the initial PM program based on OEM recommended PM?

Did you include manhours spent on overhauls especially during shutdowns? These manhours can be big.


Josh,

I know that my plant still in reactive culture and try to improve while all basic PM that OEM recommend are in place. Our plant running 16 yrs ago but why manhour spend only corrective work.

In practicle, I'm not sure how frequency calcuate CM/PM M-H ratio? I do that a month and data sources from routine maintenance only not count work during shutdown or outage.

I don't know how to start and motivate in my team???

I think your plant needs to get a detailed RCM done by some experts in the field.  After following OEM recommendations, you are obviously having more failures, indicated by your high CM figures.  You need to go back to the drawing board and look at this from a RCM point of view.  Another route of action might be to identify all the bad actors and then carry our Root Cause analysis to identify and fix problems.  70% Corrective Maintenance is too high.  Finally, if PTT GC would be able to spend a bit more, then you can look into AI enabled "prescriptive" maintenance regimes.  I know I am replying to a very old thread; but if this is helpful to anyone, then so be it!!

RM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×