Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering

A SWOT analysis of reliability centered maintenance framework

GAJANAND Gupta Rajesh P Mishra
Article information:
To cite this document:
GAJANAND Gupta Rajesh P Mishra , (2016),"A SWOT analysis of reliability centered maintenance framework", Journal of
Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 22 Iss 2 pp. -
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JQME-01-2015-0002
Downloaded on: 15 April 2016, At: 12:01 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 42 times since 2016*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2016),"Optimal maintenance level of equipment with the multiple components", Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 22 Iss 2 pp. -
(2016),"Representation of replacement rules in the form of a matrix", Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 22
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

Iss 2 pp. -
(2016),"Airline maintenance strategies in-house vs. outsourced an optimization approach", Journal of Quality in
Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 22 Iss 2 pp. -

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:402646 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 A SWOT analysis of reliability centered maintenance framework
_______________________________________________________________________________

Abbreviations :
RCM : Reliability centered maintenance
SWOT : Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
FMECA : Failure mode effect and criticality analysis
FSI : Functionally significant item
IRCMA : Intelligent reliability centered maintenance
RM : Radical maintenance
FMEA : Failure mode and effect analysis
PM : Preventive maintenance
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

FFA : Functional failure analysis

FFMEA : Function, Failure mode and effect analysis
MSI : Maintenance significant items

1. Introduction
Along with the increasing expansion of technology and competition among industries,
organizations employ different strategies and policies to increase productivity and
decrease costs. Maintenance is a policy which is used in production industries to
decrease costs, increase productivity, and to continue with the global competition. A
lot of maintenance strategies have been developed during last few years. RCM has
been one of the most recent strategies in maintenance around the world. RCM
originated in the Airline industry in the 1960s as a systematic process for
development and optimization of the maintenance requirements of a physical resource
in its operating context to realize its inherent reliability by logically incorporating the
maintenance strategies like reactive, preventive, condition-based and proactive
maintenance. Around the world, it is an imperative technology in the industry
maintenance field that can be functional to improve the equipment availability and
reliability and reduce operational and maintenance costs. The theory of RCM is the
function of the operating system to recognize the consequences of the failure by the
failure analysis and system function.
Since RCM implementation is a strategic decision and assumes that managers tend to
utilise a framework for implementation, they cannot afford to make a mistake in
selecting a suitable framework. The authors are left with a problem of how to choose
one particular framework from the list of frameworks. Hence, in this paper, an effort
has been made to overcome the above problem. The paper is structured as follows:
Section 2 describes a brief literature review of RCM and SWOT analysis, Section 3
presents the elements of RCM frameworks , Section 4 enumerates the comparison of
elements of RCM frameworks followed by the used methodology and conclusion of
paper in section 5 and 6 respectively.

1
 2. Literature Review
2.1. Reliability centered maintenance

Many authors have made attempts for development of RCM concept since 1960.
Nowlan & Heap (1978) first introduce the RCM concept in 1978 as it refers to a
scheduled-maintenance program designed to recognize the inherent reliability
capabilities of equipment. Richet et al.(1995) applied the fundamental principles
of RCM to 15 foundries which were very distinct in terms of type, size, level of
technology and geographical location. Nour et al.(1998) emphasized the
importance of careful analysis of the reliability of machine components in order to
optimize the maintenance program. Pujadas et al. (1996) formulated a specialized
maintenance decision support system that combines the merits of RCM and
FMECA. Goodfellow et al. (2000) analysed the opportunities for the application
of RCM techniques to overhead electric utility distribution systems. Reder et al.
(2000) introduced the application of RCM techniques for underground distribution
systems. Al-Ghamdi et al. (2000) presented the concepts and implementation steps
for RCM and improved an existing time-based maintenance program at a local
plant in Saudi Arabia. Fonseca et al. (2000) developed a new framework for RCM
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

implementation in the chemical process industry. Penrose et al. (2005) applied

RCM techniques on electric motors. Dehghanian & Aminifar (2013) proposed a
method to adopt the principles of RCM in power distribution systems in the form
of a practical RCM framework. Cheng et al. (2008) proposed a framework for
intelligent RCM analysis (IRCMA). Gang & Michael (2009) presented condition-
based maintenance framework integrated with reliability centered maintenance. Li
& Gao (2010) proposed the concepts and analysis of RCM by considering Radical
maintenance (RM) in a petrochemical industry. Fore & Mudavanhu (2011)
developed a framework for implementation of an RCM approach in a chipping
and sawing mill. Chen & Zhang (2012) described the implementation of reliability
centered maintenance in Chinas nuclear energy field. Liang et al. (2012) applied
the concepts of RCM to evaluate the reciprocating compressor. Literature review
shows that RCM includes all historical records such as the list of FSI, FMECA
information (Cheng et al., 2008) and achievements of RCM applications on the
overhead lines (Goodfellow, 2000), underground systems (Reder & Flaten, 2000),
chemical industry (Fonseca & Knapp, 2000) and processed oil & gas industry
(Guevara & Souza, 2008).

2.2. SWOT analysis

SWOT is a straight forward framework that indicates the significance of external
and internal forces for the reason of understanding the sources of competitive
advantage. SWOT is a logical approach on which every organization should
assess its external and internal environments to adopt its strategy (Ghazinoory et
al, 2011). SWOT helps to make a decision whether the problems faced by an
organization rotate around a need to improve strategy, a need to get better strategy
implementation, or both. SWOT analyse is can generally help to represent a
strategic organizational situation and to recognize what information is needed and
what decisions are likely to be made at a personal as well as organization level
(Krishna and Dugger, 1995). This tool helps in recognizing the organizations
current performance (strengths and weaknesses) and the organizations future
(opportunities and threats) by accounting for the factors that exist in the external
background.
Ghazinoory et. al (2011) published a review paper on SWOT analysis. He has been
found a significant work in literatures (more than 550 research papers) for
2
 making strategic decision using SWOT analysis in many areas like
manufacturing, transportation, IT, construction, electronic, oil & gas industries
etc. . Many authors published a SWOT analysis for the frameworks of total
productive maintenance, world class maintenance and lean implementation for
making a strategic decision (Mishra et al., 2007, 2008 & 2014). The advocates of
SWOT, strengths refer to intrinsic abilities to compete and grow strong.
Weaknesses are the intrinsic deficiencies that cripple growth and survival.
Opportunities are the better chances and prologues existing for growth. Threats
are externally wielded challenges, which might contain inherent strengths,
accelerate weakness and stifle opportunities from being exploded.

3. Elements of RCM frameworks

This section represents the elements and their sequence in various existing RCM
frameworks in literatures. The repeatable and consistent methodology is one of the
most important requirements for the success of RCM implementation. Literature
review shows that there is a lack of structured implementation procedure for RCM
and a structured implementation process can be one of the success factors for the
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

RCM program in an organization. The structured implementation process is usually

represented in the form of a particular framework and a framework can act as a guide
and it provides a structured way to achieve its objectives. Some of the existing
frameworks were proposed by academicians, while most of them were proposed by
practitioners or consultants who have developed these frameworks based on their
practical experience with different organizations. But the frameworks which are given
by practitioners or consultants are also qualitative in nature, while only a few
frameworks are available based on the quantitative analysis of reliability. In all these
frameworks, the principal activities of RCM are organized as elements. The elements
of the various frameworks available in literatures are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: The elements of various frameworks of RCM

4. Comparison of elements of RCM frameworks

About 19 frameworks of RCM have been studied. Among these frameworks, only
few frameworks are unique, while most of them are more or less similar. Only the
naming and the sequence of elements are different. Based on the definition of each
element which is defined by their respective authors in respective framework, similar
elements compared and clubbed in Table 2, which is shows a matrix of numbers,
which represents the order of each element (given row-wise), as mentioned in the
corresponding frameworks (given column-wise).The order of each element represents
the sequence of that element in the respective framework.
Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks

5. Methodology
Since implementation of RCM program is a strategic decision, it is necessary that
managers/practitioners of different organizations should identify a suitable framework
and they cannot afford to make a mistake in the selection process. But a greater
hurdle in this selection process is the availability of large number of frameworks in
the literature. Hence a strategic tool the SWOT analysis was chosen for analyzing
these frameworks and grouped together into three clusters, namely Group A, Group B
and Group C, based on their qualitative or theoretical, quantitative and practical
3
 approach, respectively. Grouping of various frameworks of RCM is shown in Table
3. This study can be used to assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats of each RCM framework, it can provide adequate support for the
manager/practitioners in making a better decision of implementing a suitable RCM
framework.
According to Ghazinoory et. al (2011) SWOT analysis can be categorized as
follows:-

The first category deals with problems in implementation of new technologies
within organizations that can be solved by organizing SWOT panel
effectively.

The second category deals with integrating SWOT with other decision making
techniques
In this paper, the first category of SWOT analysis has been adapted as follows
to analyse the RCM frameworks.

Strength: If any RCM framework has a unique element/feature when

compared to others, then it is considered as the strength for that framework.
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

Weakness: If the common elements of RCM that were identified in

comparative analysis are missing in a framework, then it is considered as the
weakness for that framework.
Opportunity: In a RCM framework, if an element, which may not be an
important element for RCM implementation or if it is not directly related to
RCM, but if incorporated can provide significant competitive advantage to the
organisation, then it is considered to be opportunity for other frameworks.
Threat: If an element in the framework, which may not be an important
element for RCM implementation, but if it is not present/implemented can
spoil the entire implementation, then it is considered as a threat.

Table 3: Grouping of RCM frameworks

Based on these concepts of SWOT analysis, the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats for different frameworks of RCM were identified. Since the frameworks
having common elements, may have same strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats, it was considered logically to perform a SWOT analysis on a group. SWOT
analysis has been performed for each of the groups mentioned in Table 3. The SWOT
analyses for Group A, Group B and Group C are discusses in the following sections.
5.1. SWOT analysis of group A frameworks

Group A consists of following nine frameworks, namely, Nowlan and Heap (1978),
Rausand (1998), Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004), Cheng & Jia (2005), Niu et al. (2009),
Singh & Singh (2010), Kianfar et al. (2010), Selvik et al. (2011), Prabhakar et al.
(2013). The SWOT analysis of group A frameworks is shown in Table 4.

Table 4: SWOT analysis of Group A frameworks

5.2. SWOT analysis for group B frameworks

These frameworks are based on purely quantitative reliability and failure analysis and
developed by Yu & Zhao (2005), Bertling et al. (2005), Dehghanian et al. (2013),

4
 Yssaad et a.l (2014). Apart from Quantitative analysis other elements are more or less
similar to Group A frameworks. The SWOT analysis of group B frameworks is
shown in Table 5.

Table 5: SWOT analysis of Group B frameworks

5.3. SWOT analysis for group C frameworks

These frameworks are based on their practical application in different industries and
developed by Srikrishna & Yadav (1996), Despande & Modak (2002), Gabbar&
Yamashita (2003), Penrose (2005), Chen & Zhang (2012), Liang& Hu (2012). In
these frameworks basically Qualitative analysis is used, so these frameworks are more
or less similar to Group A frameworks. The SWOT analysis of group C frameworks
is shown in Table 6.
Table 6: SWOT analysis of group C frameworks

6. Conclusion
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

This paper presents a SWOT analysis of various RCM frameworks which exist in
literature and extensively used by industries around the globe. An extensive study of
19 RCM frameworks has been done to identify the key steps involved in each of these
frameworks. The study of RCM frameworks revealed that the approaches followed by
different frameworks can be utilized to categorize them into three different groups
Group A, B and C. Group A frameworks involved qualitative RCM approaches,
Group B frameworks were based on a quantitative approach and Group C frameworks
employed practical approaches which are majorly used in small scale industries,
nuclear power plants, etc. A comparative study was done for these groups involving
different RCM frameworks on the basis of the SWOT analysis of each group. The
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for each of these groups have been
successfully identified and presented in the paper. The findings of each group
frameworks as follows:
 Group A : These frameworks can be used for planning the preventive
maintenance based on continuous improvement. These frameworks provide a
proper way to select the appropriate maintenance strategy to reduce the
maintenance costs. These frameworks can be used to plan & control the
maintenance expenses, however the lack of knowledge of quantitative
reliability analysis is the major drawback for proper understanding of RCM
concepts.
 Group B : Based on logical and structured reliability analysis group B
frameworks provides the quantitative relationship between system reliability
and maintenance effort however these are very Complex, time consuming and
requires a lot of substantial input data.
 Group C : These frameworks are used in practice in various industries and are
based on qualitative failure analysis and computer aided RCM however these
frameworks are also having the lacks of quantitative reliability analysis
similar to group A.

The knowledge of strengths and weaknesses of different RCM strategy presented in

the paper can help industry specialists to make a choice among different approaches
based on the requirements of the industry and resources available.

5
 References
1. Rausand M. Reliability centered maintenance, Reliability Engineering and
System Safety, 1998; 60: 121 132
2. Nowlan F. S., Heap H. F. Reliability-Centered Maintenance. Springfield,
VA: National Technical Information Service, U. S. Department of Commerce
1978
3. Richet D., Cotaina N., Gabriel M., Reilly K. Application of reliability
centered maintenance in the foundry sector, Control Engineering Practice,
1995; 3(7): 1029 1034
4. Nour G. A., Beaudoin H., Ouellet P., Rochette R., Lambert S. A reliability
based maintenance policy: A case study, Computers Industrial Engineering
1998; 35 (3): 591 594
5. Pujadas W., Chen F. F. A reliability centered maintenance strategy for a
discrete part manufacturing facility, Computers Industrial Engineering 1996;
31(1): 241 244
6. Goodfellow J. W. Applying reliability centered maintenance to overhead
electric utility distribution systems, Proceeding of IEEE Power Eng. Soc.
Summer Meeting 2000; 1: 566569
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

7. Fonseca D. J., Knapp G. M. An expert system for reliability centered

maintenance in the chemical industry, Expert Systems with Applications 2000;
19: 45 57
8. Penrose H. W. RCM-based motor management, Electrical Insulation
Conference and Electrical Manufacturing Expo, 2005; 5, 187-190
9. Dehghanian P., Aminifar F. A comprehensive scheme for reliability centered
maintenance in power distribution systems Part I: Methodology, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery2013; 28(2): 761 770
10. Cheng Z. H., Jia X., Gao S. P. A framework for intelligent reliability
centered maintenance analysis, Reliability Engineering and System Safety
2008; 93: 784-792
11. Gang N., Michael P. A framework for cost-effective and accurate maintenance
combining CBM, RCM and data fusion, IEEE 2009; 605-611
12. Li D., Gao J. Study and application of reliability- centered maintenance
considering radical maintenance, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process
Industries 2010; 23: 622 629
13. Fore S., Mudavanhu T., Application of RCM for a chipping and sawing
mill, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology 2011; 9(2): 204 226
14. Chen Y., Zhang T. Application and development of reliability centered
maintenance (RCM) in chinas nuclear energy field, IEEE 2012; 12: 543 548
15. Liang W., Lianfang P., Zhang L., Hu J. Reliability-centered maintenance
study on key parts of reciprocating compressor, IEEE 2012,414 448
16. Reder W., Flaten D. Reliability centered maintenance for distribution
underground systems, Proceeding of IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Summer
Meeting, 2000; 1: 551556
17. Fonseca D. J., Knapp G. M. An expert system for reliability centered
maintenance in the chemical industry, Expert Systems with Applications 2000;
19: 45 57
18. Guevara F. J. C., Souza G. F. M. RCM application for availability
improvement of gas turbines used in combined cycle power stations, IEEE
Latin America Trans. 2008; 6(5): 401407
19. Srikrishna S, Yadava G. S., Rao P. N. Reliability Centered Maintenance
applied to power plant auxiliaries, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, 1996; 2: 3-14.

6
 20. Deshpande V., Modak J. Application of RCM to a medium scale industry.
Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2002;77(1):3143.
21. Gabbar H. A., Yamashita H., Suzuki, K., Shimada Y. (2003). Computer-
aided RCM-based plant maintenance management system. Robotics and
Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 2003;19(5):449458
22. Smith A., Hinchcliffe G. RCM: Gateway to World Class Maintenance,
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford 2004
23. Cheng Z. An Intelligent Reliability Centered Maintenance Analysis System
Based on Case-Based Reasoning & Rule-Based Reasoning, IEEE 2005; 545
549.
24. Yu J., Zhao H. Maintenance plan based on RCM. 2005 IEEE Transmission &
Distribution Conference & Exposition: Asia and Pacific, 2005; 14
25. Bertling L., Allan R., Eriksson R. A Reliability-Centered Asset Maintenance
Method for Assessing the Impact of Maintenance in Power Distribution
Systems, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, 2005; 20(1):75
82.
26. Niu G., Pecht M. A Framework for Cost-effective and Accurate Maintenance
Combining CBM RCM and Data Fusion, IEEE 2009; 605611.
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

27. Singh M., Sachdeva A., Bhardwaj A., Gupta R., Singh S. An introduction to
total productive maintenance and reliability centered maintenance, National
Conference on Advancements and Futuristic Trends in Mechanical and
Materials Engineering, Feb. 19-20, 2010; 252255.
28. Kianfar A., Kianfar F. Plant function deployment via RCM and QFD,
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 2010;16(4): 354366.
29. Selvik J. T., Aven T. A framework for reliability and risk centered
maintenance. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2011; 96(2): 324331.
30. Chen Y., Zhang T. Application & development of Reliability-centered
Maintenance (RCM) in Chinas nuclear energy field. International Conference
on Quality, Reliability, Risk, Maintenance, and Safety Engineering, 2012;
543548
31. Liang W., Pang L., Zhang L., Hu J. Reliability-centered maintenance study
on key parts of reciprocating compressor, International Conference on
Quality, Reliability, Risk, Maintenance, and Safety Engineering,2012; 414
418.
32. Prabhakar D., Raj V. P. A New Model For Reliability Centered Maintenance
In Petroleum Refineries, International Journal of Scientific & Technology
Research 2013; 2(5): 5664.
33. Yssaad B., Khiat M., Chaker A. Reliability centered maintenance optimization
for power distribution systems. International Journal of Electrical Power &
Energy Systems 2014;55: 108115
34. Balamuralikrishna R., Dugger J. SWOT analysis: A management tool for
initiating new programs in vocational schools, Journal of Vocational and
Technical Education 1995; 12
35. Mishra R. P., Anand G., Kodali R. A SWOT analysis of total productive
maintenance frameworks, Int. J. Management Practice 2008; 3(1): 5181.
36. Mishra R. P., Anand G., Kodali R. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and
threats analysis for frameworks of world-class maintenance, Proceedings of
the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering
Manufacture 2007; 221(7) : 1193-1208
37. Mishra R. P., Chakraborty A Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
analysis of lean implementation frameworks, International Journal of Lean
Enterprise Research 2014, 1(2), 162-182

7
 38. Ghazinoory S., Abdi M., Mehr M. Swot methodology: a state-of-the-art
review for the past, a framework for the future, Journal of Business Economics
and Management 2011, 12(1): 2448
39. Al-Ghamdi A.S., Duffuaa S.O., Raouf A., Reliability Centered Maintenance
Concepts And Applications: A Case Study, International Journal of Industrial
Engineering 2000, 7, 123-132

About the Authors

Gajanand Gupta is working as a lecturer and pursuing his Ph.D in the Mechanical
Engineering Department of Birla Institute of Technology & Science, Pilani. He
earned his Degree of Masters of Technology (M.Tech), specializing in Production
Engineering from the NIT Rourkela in May 2011 after completing his B. Tech in
Mechanical Engineering from ECK Kota, in June 2009. His research interests are in
the areas of Reliability Engineering and Maintenance Management.

Prof. Rajesh P Mishra started his professional career as a Lecturer in Mechanical

Engineering department at BITS, Pilani, which he joined in June 2005 after gaining
his PhD from Same Institute. Presently he is serving as an Assistant Professor
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

Mechanical Engineering Department. He has published number of papers in

international journals and has participated in a number of conferences, presenting
technical papers. He is currently guiding one PhD. His research interests are in the
areas of Reliability Engineering, manufacturing management, maintenance
management.

8
 Table 1: The elements of various frameworks of RCM
1. Nowlan and Heap (1978)
1. Partitioning equipments into
object categories.
2. Identify significant items.
3. Evaluating maintenance
requirement for each significant
item.
4. Identifying items for which no
applicable and effective task
can be found.
5. Selecting maintenance intervals
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)
for each equipment.
6. Establish an age exploration
program
2. Srikrishnaet al. (1996)
1. Selection of critical auxiliaries
2. data collection
3. selection of significant
maintenance items
4. the maintenance decision
process
5. selection of maintenance
periodicity
3. Rausand, (1998)
1. Study preparation
2. System selection and definition
3. Functional failure analysis
(FFA)
4. Critical item selection
5. Data collection and analysis
6. Failure mode effect and
criticality analysis (FMECA)
7. Selection of maintenance
actions
8. Determination of maintenance
intervals
9. Preventive maintenance
comparison analysis
10. Treatment of non-critical items
11. Implementation
12. In-service data collection and
updating
4. Deshpande & Modak (2002)
1. System selection and
information collection
2. system boundary definition
3. system description and
functional block diagram
4. system functions and functions
failures
5. failure mode and effect analysis
6. logic tree analysis
7. tasks selection
5. Gabbar et al. (2003)
1. Asset assessment
2. Assess failure
3. Decide maintenance strategy
4. Decide maintenance tasks
5. optimize maintenance tasks
6. check and validate
6. Smith et al. (2003)
1. System selection and
Information Collection
2. System Boundary Definition
3. System Description and
Functional Block Diagram
4. System Functions and
functional failure
5. Failure mode and effect
analysis (FMEA)
6. Logic Tree Analysis
7. Task Selection
7. Penrose (2005)
1. Set boundaries and create a
functional block diagram with
partitioning of the system under
review
2. Determine functional failures
3. Determine functionally
significant items of the system
4. Perform a Failure Modes and
Effects Analysis (FMEA)
 5. Perform a logic tree analysis in
order to determine the
effectiveness of maintenance
tasks for the FMEA;
6. Determine servicing and
lubrication tasks;
7. Set maintenance requirements
for the system;
8. Draft and evaluate maintenance
procedures;
9. Determine tasks for inactive
equipment and, Develop
corrective maintenance
processes, procedures and
specifications
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)
8. Cheng & Jia(2005)
1. Identification of functionally
significant items
2. Retrieval of structure tree of
FSI of the similar equipment
from equipment case base.
3. FMEA
4. RCM logic decision analysis
5. Combining PM tasks to form a
RCM program
9. Yu & Zhao(2005)
1. Preliminary classification if
equipment
2. Historical maintenance
database
3. Function, failure mode and
effect analysis (FFMEA)
4. Identification of maintenance
items and modes
5. Formulation of maintenance
program
6. Implementation of maintenance
program
7. Evaluation of maintenance
results
10. Bertling et al. (2005)
1. Define Reliability model and
required input data
2. Identify critical components by
reliability analysis
3. Identify failure cause by failure
mode analysis
4. Define a failure rate model
5. Model effect of Preventive
maintenance (PM) methods on
reliability for each failure cause
6. Deduce different plans for
applying PM and evaluate the
resulting effect on the
component failure rate
7. Define and implement different
strategies for PM
8. Estimate the resulting
composite failure rate
9. Compare system reliability
when applying different
maintenance methods and PM
strategies
10. Identify cost effective PM
strategy
11. NIU & PECHT (2009)
1. Objection identification
2. determine ways of function
failures
3. determine failures models
4. assessing the effects of failure
5. Identification of maintenance
tasks
6. identification of maintenance
interval
7. Program evaluation & cost
analysis
12. Singh et al. (2010)
1. Study preparation
2. system selection and definition
3. functional failure analysis
4. critical item selection
5. data collection and analysis
6. FMECA
7. Selection of maintenance
actions
8. determination of maintenance
intervals
 9. preventive maintenance
comparison analysis
10. Implementation
13. Kianfar & Kianfar (2010)
1. System selection and
information collection
2. System boundary definition
3. System descriptions and
functional block diagram
4. System functions and
functional failures
5. Failure modes and effect
analysis
6. Ranking of failure modes
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)
7. Task selection
8. Implementation
14. Selvik & Aven (2011)
1. Identification of Maintenance
significant items (MSI)
2. PM task assessments
3. PM interval assessments
4. Packing of PM tasks
5. Uncertainty analysis
6. Uncertainty evaluation &
presentation of results
7. Managerial review and
judgment
8. Preventive maintenance
program
15. Chen & Zhang (2012)
1. Boundary definition
2. Function analysis
3. Function failure & effect
analysis
4. identification of the critical
equipment
5. Critical equipment failures and
strategies application
6. PM evaluation of the non-
critical equipment
7. Comparison analysis of
maintenance tasks
8. Maintenance tasks list
16. Lianget al. (2012)
1. System division and
Identification of FSI
2. FMEA of FSI
3. Criticality analysis or Risk
analysis or identify the level of
FSI
4. RCM logic , making
maintenance strategy
17. Dehghanian et al. (2013)
1. system boundary identification
2. Critical component
identification
3. failure mode determination of
critical components
4. critical failure mode
recognition
5. failure cause specification of
critical failure modes
6. failure rate modelling of critical
components
7. load point/ system reliability
evaluation
8. outlining possible maintenance
strategies
18. Prabhakar et al. (2013)
1. Reliability audits and analysis
2. Identifying Likely failure
modes
3. FMECA on critical equipment
4. Feedback and measurement
19. Yssaad et al. (2014)
1. Define the system- identify
levels of indenture
2. Define ground rules and
assumptions
3. Construction equipment tree
4. FMECA
5. Assign maintenance focus
levels based on criticality
6. Apply RCM decision logic
7. Identify maintenance tasks
8. Make recommendations and
package final maintenance
program
9. Feedback - continuous re-
evaluation and improvement
 Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks

Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004)

Gabbar & Yamashita (2003)
Despande & Modak (2002)
Srikrishna & yadav (1996)

Dehghanian et al. (2013)

Nowlan and Heap (1978)

Prabhakar et al (2013)
Singh & Singh (2010)

Chen & Zhang (2012)

Bertling et al (2005)
Cheng & Jia (2005)

Kianfar et al (2010)

Liang & Hu (2012)

Yssaad et al (2014)
S.

Yu & Zhao (2005)

Selvik et al (2011)
Rausand (1998)

Niu et al (2009)
Penrose (2005)
N
o.
Authors/ consultants

No. of elements 6 5 12 7 6 7 10 3 7 10 7 10 8 8 8 4 11 4 9
system boundary
definition/ data
Collection and
analysis/ System
1 2 5 2 2 2 1 5 2 1 1 1
boundary
identification/Define
system and
subsystem boundaries
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

system functions and

functions failures/
Assess failure/
Determine functional
failures/ Functional
2 3 4 2 4 2 2 3 4 2 2
failure
analysis/Define
subsystem interface,
functions and
functional failure
FMECA/ FMEA of
FSI/Define failure
modes for each
functional
failure/FFMEA/Ident
Name of elements

3 6 5 5 4 2 3 3 3 6 5 3 2 5 3 4
ify failure cause by
failure mode
analysis/Failure cause
specification of
critical failure modes
Tasks selection/ The
maintenance decision
process/Decide
maintenance tasks/
Develop corrective
maintenance
processes, procedures
4 4 7 7 4 7 10 5 5 7 7 8 7
and specifications/
selection of
maintenance
analysis/Outlining
possible maintenance
strategies/ Categorize
maintenance tasks
System selection and
information
collection/ system
5 2 1 1 1 1 2 1
selection and
definition/Asset
assessment
Logic tree analysis/
6 RCM logic decision 6 3 6 5 3 4 6
analysis
 Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks Continue. . .

Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004)

Gabbar & Yamashita (2003)
Despande & Modak (2002)
Srikrishna & yadav (1996)

Dehghanian et al. (2013)

Nowlan and Heap (1978)

Prabhakar et al (2013)
Singh & Singh (2010)

Chen & Zhang (2012)

Bertling et al (2005)
Cheng & Jia (2005)

Kianfar et al (2010)

Liang & Hu (2012)

Yssaad et al (2014)
Yu & Zhao (2005)

Selvik et al (2011)
S.

Rausand (1998)

Niu et al (2009)
Penrose (2005)
No.
Authors/ consultants

No. of elements 6 5 12 7 6 7 10 3 7 10 7 10 8 8 8 4 11 4 9
Implementation/Impl
ement maintenance
tasks/ Define and
implement different
7 11 6 7 10 8 8
strategies for
PM/Implementation
of maintenance
program
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

system description
and functional block
diagram/ Set
boundaries and create
8 1 3 3 1 3 3
a functional block
diagram/ system
devision/Constructio
n equipment tree
Selection of critical
auxiliaries/ Critical
item selection/
9 critical component 1 4 2 4 4 2
identification/Identif
y critical components
by reliability analysis
Set maintenance
requirements for the
Name of elements

system/
Determination of
maintenance
10 5 5 8 7 6 8 3
interval/PM interval
assessments /
Selection of
maintenance
periodicity
Draft and evaluate
maintenance
procedures/
11 Preventive 3 9 8 6 9 2
maintenance analysis
/ PM task
assessments
Check and validate/
Feedback and
measurement/
Evaluation of
maintenance results/
Feedback -
continuous re-
12 evaluation and 12 6 7 12 4 9
improvement/ In-
service data
collection and
updating/ Evaluation
of the reliability
outcomes
 Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks Continue. . .

Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004)

Gabbar & Yamashita (2003)
Despande & Modak (2002)
Srikrishna & yadav (1996)

Dehghanian et al. (2013)

Nowlan and Heap (1978)

Prabhakar et al (2013)
Singh & Singh (2010)

Chen & Zhang (2012)

Bertling et al (2005)
Cheng & Jia (2005)

Kianfar et al (2010)

Liang & Hu (2012)

Yssaad et al (2014)
Yu & Zhao (2005)

Selvik et al (2011)
S.

Rausand (1998)

Niu et al (2009)
Penrose (2005)
No.
Authors/ consultants

No. of elements 6 5 12 7 6 7 10 3 7 10 7 10 8 8 8 4 11 4 9
Selection of significant
maintenance items/
Identification of
maintenance items and
13 modes/ Identification of 2 3 3 1 4 1 1
MSI/Determine
functionally significant
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

items of the system/

Identification of FSI
Optimize maintenance
tasks/Selection of
14 5 7 10
optimal maintenance
strategies
Name of elements

Critical failure mode

15 4 4
recognition
Identifying Likely
failure modes/ Failure
mode determination of
16 6 5 3
critical components/
Ranking of failure
modes
load point/ system
reliability evaluation/
Reliability audits and
17 1 7 1
analysis / Define
Reliability model and
required input data
cost/benefit analysis
and ranking of
18 10 7 9
strategies/ Identify cost
effective PM strategy
Make
recommendations and
package final
19 8 8
maintenance program/
Preventive maintenance
program
Determine tasks for
inactive equipment/
20 4 10 9 6
Treatment of non-
critical items
 Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks Continue. . .

Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004)

Gabbar & Yamashita (2003)
Despande & Modak (2002)
Srikrishna & yadav (1996)

Dehghanian et al. (2013)

Nowlan and Heap (1978)

Prabhakar et al (2013)
Singh & Singh (2010)

Chen & Zhang (2012)

Bertling et al (2005)
Cheng & Jia (2005)

Kianfar et al (2010)

Liang & Hu (2012)

Yssaad et al (2014)
Yu & Zhao (2005)

Selvik et al (2011)
S.

Rausand (1998)

Niu et al (2009)
Penrose (2005)
No.
Authors/ consultants

No. of elements 6 5 12 7 6 7 10 3 7 10 7 10 8 8 8 4 11 4 9

Determine servicing
21 6 4
and lubrication tasks/
Packing of PM tasks
Criticality analysis/Risk
22 analysis/ Identify the 3 5
level of FSI
23 Study Preparation 1 1
Compare system
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

reliability when
Name of elements

24 applying different 9
maintenance methods
and PM strategies
Failure rate modeling of
critical components/
25 4 6
Define a failure rate
model

26 Estimate the resulting 8

composite failure rate
Model effect of PM
27 methods on reliability 5
for each failure cause
Reliability
28 improvements via 11
maintenance plans
29 Uncertainty analysis 5
Uncertainty evaluation
30 & presentation of 6
results
Managerial review and
31 7
judgment
Define ground rules and
32
assumptions 2
Establish an age
33 6
exploration program
 Table 3: Grouping of RCM Frameworks

Groups Authors/Consultants Remarks

Group A Nowlan and Heap (1978), Rausand (1998), Theoretical or Qualitative
Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004), Cheng & Jia RCM approach
(2005), Niu et al (2009), Singh & Singh
(2010), Kianfar et al (2010), Selvik et al
(2011), Prabhakar et al (2013)

Group B Yu & Zhao (2005), Bertling et al (2005), Quantitative RCM approach

Dehghanian et al. (2013), Yssaad et al
(2014)

Group C Srikrishna & yadav (1996), Despande & Practically applied

Modak (2002), Gabbar & Yamashita (2003), frameworks in various
Penrose (2005), Chen & Zhang (2012), Liang industries like small scale,
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

& Hu (2012) nuclear and power plant etc.

 Table 4: SWOT analysis of Group A frameworks
Strengths

Widely accepted framework

Systematic analysis for planning the
preventive maintenance of technical systems

Supports adaptive and dynamic maintenance
strategy

Provides way to select the appropriate
maintenance strategy

Team based improvement process

Maintenance expenses are planned and
controlled

Continuous improvement

establish documented improvement methods

increases the reliability of system by failure
analysis

Critical items are dealt with a higher priority
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)
for maintenance action

Maintenance tasks are directed towards
failure and functional degradation

Reduces maintenance costs due to
elimination of unnecessary maintenance
actions
Opportunities

RCM process can be directly link to design
phase of equipment

Needs to integrate RCM with other
continuous improvement programmes

Reduces maintenance tasks for equipments
or machines

Development of innovative designs for
maintenance prevention

improves safety and reduces accidents

reduces the investment on new equipments
as present equipment will be more reliable

changes the attitude of the employees
toward continuous improvement

helps maintenance personnel to become
multi-skilled

optimize the maintenance procedures of
bottleneck operations

Reduces item/equipment replacement

builds teamwork and cooperation among
employees
Weakness

Limited assessments of risk and
uncertainties

Lack of Quantitative reliability analysis

Strategies are only rudimentary

Strategies are made on an ad-hoc basis

A process where PMs are only widely
carried out

lack of understanding of RCM concepts
by top management

lack of in-house training facilities

Contradiction of management activities

Long time required for implementation

Resistance to daily discipline

Long term process for data collection
and failure analysis

how to relate RCM process to cost
reduction

Poor structure to support the RCM
teams and their activities

The challenge of passion
Threats

Resistance from employees

management may not be easily
convinced

Savings potential not easily seen by
management

Need of highly skilled maintenance
personnel required for implementation

availability of system failure data
 Table 5: SWOT analysis of Group B frameworks
Strengths

Quantitative relationship between
system reliability and maintenance effort

Straight forward algorithm for
implementation of RCM

Logical and structured reliability analysis

Failure rate modelling

Reduces unexpected breakdowns

Economic analysis of maintenance tasks

Use of standardized components for
reliability analysis

Established for preventive maintenance
tasks

Other strengths are more or less similar
to group A
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)
Opportunities

Feedback systems can produce better
results

Can be applied in other industries after
simplification of algorithm

Can be established for other maintenance
strategies also

Other Opportunities are more or less
similar to group A
Table 6: SWOT analysis of group C frameworks
Strengths

Practically use of Qualitative failure
analysis in various industries

Use of Computer aided RCM

Other Strengths are more or less similar
to group A
Opportunities

Quantitative analysis approach can also
be used for the same equipment or
industry

Can be utilize for manufacturing or
process industries also

Other Opportunities are more or less
similar to group A
Weaknesses

Substantial input data required to support
the method

Need of significant updates of relevant data
bases

Limited to power distribution industry

Implementation needs expertise

Complex and time consuming algorithm

Other weaknesses are more or less similar
to group A
Threats

Reliability outcomes after such a complex
analysis

Need of highly skilled maintenance
personnel for reliability analysis

Inefficiency in updating of database can
cause the variation/disastrous the results

Other threats are more or less similar to
group A
Weaknesses

Lack of quantitative reliability analysis

Focused on practical use of RCM
approach to individual equipments rather
than entire system

Practical use of RCM approach limited to
nuclear plant, power plant or power
distribution industries

Other Weaknesses are more or less
similar to group A
Threats
Threats are more or less similar to Group
A