Asset Management and

Reliability Centred Maintenance

The benefits to your organization

By : SKF
For : NMEC
Date : 09-11-2016
 How do you feel today?

© SKF Group Slide 2 10 November, 2016

 Consider that:

The mind is like a parachute, it only works

when it is open!!

So please try and keep an open and enquiring mind as we go

through this material

© SKF Group
 Agenda

Introduction

Asset Management

Reliability Centred Maintenance

Case Studies and Results

Benchmarking to Analyze your Asset

Management practices

Conclusions

Q&A

© SKF Group
Introduction
Egon Doyer
- Global Business Development Manager, Asset Reliability Solutions
- 37 years industry experience

Experience
- Asset Reliability Solutions, 9 years
• Project Management RCM projects
• Business Development
• Assessments and Benchmarking
- Maintenance Management, 9 years
• Maintenance Management System implementations
• Project Management
• RCM
• Business Development
- ERP, Supply Chain Management, Warehouse Management &
Logistics, 11 years
- IT, 8 years
- Companies: Nixdorf / Modem / SIAC-ICL-Fujitsu / Catalyst Int. / MRO Software/ IFS /
© SKF Group
SKF
Asset Management
 Do you know where you go?

Maintenance Cost OEE

Legal Compliance
Stores Value

Energy Cost Unplanned Work

Knowledge Performance Killers &

© SKF Group

Management Cost Drivers

 Demand for Asset Management?
• The DIRECT COST of machinery
repairs undertaken during
BREAKDOWNS is at least 3 times
greater than the cost of PLANNED
REPAIRS

• PRODUCTION OUTAGE TIME

needed for the completion of an
EMERGENCY REPAIR is in the
region of 3 to 5 times that needed
for a PLANNED REPAIR

How does your plant compare?

© SKF Group
 Cost vs. Benefit
Overall
Equipment Maintenance Cost As A
Effectiveness % Of Replacement Value

Typical Reactive Mode 65 - 70% 4-5%

World Class 85% <2%

When you look at reliability benchmarks, a strange

paradox emerges. Companies that are stuck in the
reactive mode not only have lower reliability, they
also have a higher costs. The absolute best
companies have a low cost with higher reliability. This
breaks the paradigm that states, to have better
reliability you have to spend more money.

© SKF Group
 Cost vs. Benefit
Overall
Equipment Maintenance Cost As A
Effectiveness % Of Replacement Value

Typical Reactive Mode 65 - 70% 4-5%

World Class 85% <2%

Arbitrary Cost Cutting is not the answer.

It comes down to how you do things that makes the difference.

© SKF Group
 Key Success Factors for Change
Willingness to Commitment to
support implementing
processes for appropriate
implementing technology with
and sustaining PROCESS requisite financial,
change training and
personnel
resources

CULTURE TECHNOLOGY

A corporate
culture to adopt
ü ü
and embrace
the need for
change
© SKF Group
 Culture change

The seven most expensive words in

business today are:
“We have always done it this way!”

© SKF Group
 Continuous Improvement and Maturity
OEE

Where do you rank yourselve?

There is ALWAYS room for improvement!

TCO
© SKF Group
 SKF Asset Efficiency Optimization (AEO)
1. Do you know,
why you do,
2. Can you turn
what you do?
strategy into
practice ?

5. Do you
learn and
improve?
3. Can you do
what you
should, well?
4. Did you do
the right work
right?

Strategize Identify Control Execute Optimize

© SKF Group
 SKF Asset Efficiency Optimization (AEO)

Optimization
© SKF Group
SKF Asset Efficiency Optimization (AEO)
ISO55000 Elements
SKF AEO Work Management Process

personnel
SKF provides process models, procedures, hardware/ software, training and
Risk- RCM
Organizational based
strategic plan inspectio
RAM n
RCFA
modelin
g
Asset Management Policy

Asset Management Strategy

Portable SKF SKF On-line
vibration @ptitude @ptitude systems
Asset Management Objectives analyzers Analyst Inspector
Operator SKF Protection
data @ptitude system
collectors Decision
Asset Management Plan(s)
Support
Most
Difficult
element Best Work BOMs
practices control
Asset Management consulting Spares
Implementation of process
enablers and optimization
asset management
controls
plan
Training Engineering
Technolog services
y
Bearings
Performance Living
assessment and Seals programmes

improvement Lubrication

© SKF Group Management review

 Asset Management Culture Change case
Lack of a maintenance strategy review
No CMMS implemented
Issue Big reliability problems on their machines
No frequent PdM activity
Maintenance was mostly firefighting and just partly
preventative maintenance was done

PRM contract including:

– PdM program with continuous improvement and RCA
– Lubrication optimization and management including lubrication systems service
– Spare part- and lubricant stores assessments and improvement actions
Solution – Training
– Proactive management for continuous improvement
– Maintenance strategy review
– CMMS implementation

Development of a maintenance strategy

Implementation of a maintenance management system
Better insight in business operations
Value Improved uptime and reduced amount of unplanned shutdowns
Reduced maintenance costs, improved business profitability
After the first year a sales revenue increase of 10%
© SKF Group
Reliability Centred
Maintenance
 The Cost of Breakdowns
Labour, Spares
& Fixed Costs Visible Costs

Safety Environmental
Start up and
Incident Non-
Shut down
Costs compliance

Product
Loss of
Product
Rework
Overtime
Invisible Costs
Quality Wasted
energy
materials
and labour Loss of
Legal orders and/or
Fees Customers

Consequential
equipment
damage

© SKF Group
 Paradigm Shift 2
“Reactive”
“Proactive”

“I manage the equipment

“I fix breakdowns, reliability and availability”
super fast!”

© SKF Group
 Ask yourself a few questions

What is you Maintenance Cost as a percentage of your ERV?

What is the technical availability of your line/plant?

How many breakdowns with an effect on production do you have?

What is the ratio between planned and unplanned maintenance?

What was the basis for your maintenance plan?

How many of your equipment’s went through a documented Criticality

Analysis?

© SKF Group
 AEO Model Strategy Element

The Maintenance Strategy Review / RCM

Tie the Maintenance Program to Business Goals

Assign the most effective and efficient maintenance tasks

© SKF Group
 Maintenance Strategy Review / RCM
Identify what is important
Objectives Set up criticality matrix Identify
Functions what is
Selection of critical assets
P&ID Failure modes
important
Failure causes
Failure mode, effect and
Failure interval
criticality analysis
Failure consequences

Criticality analysis
Failure characteristics analysis
Identify
Maintenance strategy selection
Cost-benefits consideration what has to be
RTF FFM CBM SM MOD
done
Legislation

Task selection Spares advise

Task comparison Existing PM program

Work packages
Implement and
Implementation improve
Continuous improvement
© SKF Group
 Maintenance Strategy Review / RCM
objectives and set up criticality matrix
Objectives Set up criticality matrix Identify
Functions what is
Selection of critical assets
P&ID Failure modes
important
Failure causes
Failure mode, effect and
Failure interval
criticality analysis
Failure consequences

Criticality analysis
Failure characteristics analysis

Cost-benefits consideration
Maintenance strategy selection
RTF FFM CBM SM MOD Legislation

Task selection Spares advise

Task comparison Existing PM program

Work packages

Implementation

Continuous improvement
© SKF Group
 Example of use of Risk/Criticality Matrix
Effect of failure Probability of failure
(1) Very (2) (3) (4) (5) Very
unlikely Unlikely Possibl Likely likely
> 10 >5 e >1 ≤1
Category Safety Environment Production Repair years years >1 month month
and ≤ year and ≤
10 and ≤ 5 12
years years months
E. Negligible Loss < 1 Cost <
No impact E1 E2 E3 E4 E5
Negligible risk hour €1.000, -
€1000,- <
D. Low First aid Low impact Loss < 1 day cost < D1 D2 D3 D4 D5
€10.000, -

€10.000, - <
Doctor Loss 1- 3
C. Medium Within plant cost < C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
treatment days
€100.000, -

€100.000, -
Serious Loss > 3
B. High Within site < cost < B1 B2 B3 B4 B5
accidents days
€500.000, -
A. Genuine risk Shutdown of
Cost >
Catastrop for human Outside site several A1 A2 A3 A4 A5
€500.000, -
hic life plants
 Maintenance Strategy Review / RCM
selection of critical assets
Objectives Set up criticality matrix Identify
Function what is
Selection of critical assets
P&ID Failure mode
important
Failure causes
Failure mode, effect and
Failure interval
criticality analysis
Failure consequences

Criticality analysis
Failure characteristics analysis

Cost-benefits consideration
Maintenance strategy selection
RTF FFM CBM SM MOD Legislation

Task selection Spares advise

Task comparison Existing PM program

Work packages

Implementation

Continuous improvement
© SKF Group
 Maintenance Strategy Review / RCM
Maintenance Strategy Selection
Objectives Set up criticality matrix Identify
Functions what is
Selection of critical assets
P&ID Failure modes
important
Failure causes
Failure mode, effect and
Failure interval
criticality analysis
Failure consequences

Criticality analysis
Failure characteristics analysis
Identify
Maintenance strategy selection
Cost-benefits consideration what has to be
RTF FFM CBM SM MOD
done
Legislation

Task selection Spares advise

Task comparison Existing PM program

Work packages
Implement and
Implementation improve
Continuous improvement
© SKF Group
Maintenance strategy decision tree
Failure (input decision tree)

Yes No
Hidden failure?

Condition
No Yes No Yes
indicator Critical failure?
available?

Yes Failure age No

related?

Condition
No Yes
indicator
available?

Constant
No Yes
failure
interval?

FFM CBM RTF SM CBM SM MOD

(Failure (Condition (Run to (Scheduled (Condition (Scheduled (Modification)
Finding Based Failure) Maintenance) Based Maintenance)
Maintenance) Maintenance) Maintenance)

© SKF Group
 Maintenance Strategy Review / RCM
task selection and spares justification
Objectives Set up criticality matrix
Functions
Selection of critical assets
P&ID Failure modes

Failure causes
Failure mode, effect and
Failure interval
criticality analysis
Failure consequences

Criticality analysis
Failure characteristics analysis
Identify
Maintenance strategy selection
Cost-benefits consideration what has to be
RTF FFM CBM SM MOD
done
Legislation

Task selection Spares advise

Task comparison Existing PM program

Work packages

Implementation

Continuous improvement
© SKF Group
 Maintenance Strategy Review / RCM
Implement and improve
Objectives Set up criticality matrix Identify
Functions what is
Selection of critical assets
P&ID Failure modes
important
Failure causes
Failure mode, effect and
Failure interval
criticality analysis
Failure consequences

Criticality analysis
Failure characteristics analysis
Identify
Maintenance strategy selection
Cost-benefits consideration what has to be
RTF FFM CBM SM MOD
done
Legislation

Task selection Spares advise

Task comparison Existing PM program

Work packages
Implement and
Implementation improve
Continuous improvement
© SKF Group
 RCM software (AMST)

© SKF Group
Case Studies and
Results
 Maintenance Strategy Review (RCM)
Filling & Packaging line
• A Clear Preventative Maintenance Plan based on criticality
• Optimize Maintenance Cost
Need • Reduce unplanned break downs
• Understand the equipment
• Less independency on supplier knowledge

• Maintenance Strategy Review

• RCM for Critical Assets
• SRCM for Non-Criticality evaluation
Capability • Total 1572 asset management tasks of which 1334 new asset management tasks
• SAP PM strategy plan development for maintenance plans
• SAP PM improvement (equipment in hierarchy)

• Very motivated engineering, maintenance and production team with ownership of the line
• Integrated with TPM program
• Operator involvement (ODR)
Value • Modification proposals; reduced risk on critical equipment
• Improved planning and scheduling
• MTBF from 10hrs – 100hrs – 200hrs – 600hrs (after 1 year) – 1000hrs

© SKF Group
 Maintenance tasks – Per analyzed area
ZL Line Total # Tasks 400 Filling & Packaging Total # Tasks 1572
New Tasks 231 New Tasks 1334
Retained Tasks 165 Retained Tasks 230
Modification 4 Modification 8
Removed Tasks Removed Tasks

Roller Dryers Total # Tasks 526 Dry Mix Total # Tasks 573
New Tasks 335 New Tasks 340
Retained Tasks 191 Retained Tasks 233
Modification Modification
Removed Tasks Removed Tasks

Raw Materials and Consolidated IC Total # Tasks 3484

Wet Tower Total # Tasks 413 New Tasks 2495
New Tasks 255 Retained Tasks 972
Retained Tasks 153 Modification 17
Modification 5 Removed Tasks
Removed Tasks

Number of removed tasks unknown: SAP tasks are in long description

© SKF Group
 Maintenance tasks per type
Task separation Tasks Production Maintenance
Check VSD / Electric motor settings 144 0 144
Lubrication 431 17 414
Check 935 187 748
Inspection 52 0 52
Calibration 121 0 121
Vibration 449 0 449
RTF 494 0 494
Clean 86 86 0
Test 47 0 47
Revision 5 0 5
Replace 450 49 401
Modification 30 4 26
Functional test 240 0 240

© SKF Group
 Cement Plant
Percentage of tasks before and after RCM

SAP current tasks RCM optimised tasks

16%
4% ELE
5% 14% EXT_INSP
0%
ELE 12% INS
42%
EXT_INSP MEC

INS CIV
22%
79% MEC EXT
EXT_LUB
OPS
3% 0%
0% 3%

31% reduction in tasks

© SKF Group
October 30, 2007 © SKF Group Slide 36
 Cement Plant
Manhours of tasks before and after RCM

SAP current task (mhrs) RCM optimised tasks (mhrs)

1%
13% 0%
ELE
2% 1% 4%
7% EXT_INSP
ELE 0%
12% INS
EXT_INSP 1%
MEC
INS CIV
73% 0%
86% MEC EXT
EXT_LUB
OPS

27% reduction in manhours

© SKF Group
October 30, 2007 © SKF Group Slide 37
 RCM result
Component Criticality Analysis
Component Criticality Analysis

2000
1800
1600 Total
No. of Components

1400 Components
Analyzed
1200
Client Critical
1000 Components
800
600 Post SRCM
Component
400
Criticality
200
0
Plant 1 Plant 2 Plant 3 Plant 4 Plant 5

© SKF Group October 30, 2007 ©

SKF Group Slide 38
Benchmarking
to Analyze your Asset
Management practices
 Continuous Improvement and Maturity
OEE

Where do you rank yourselve?

There is ALWAYS room for improvement!

TCO
© SKF Group Slide 40 10 November, 2016
 Assess & Benchmark – the basis of
change design
Review of predictive,
Cost of doing
preventive and corrective maintenance
maintenance

Training Availability
needs

Criticality

Maintenance strategy
review
Root cause analysis Total cost of
ownership

Operator driven
reliability
Store value
PM schedule
compliance
Change management
Planning accuracy procedure

© SKF Group Slide 41 10 November 2016

 Results
Customer

Customer

© SKF Group
 Traffic Light
Question Topic Industry Customer
Best Practice Results
Maintenance Strategy
1 Maintenance Budget vs ERV Less than 2.0%
2 Overall Availability More than 95%
3 Maintenance Cost vs Total Sales Less than 3.0%
4 Store Value vs ERV Less than 0.3%
5 Planned vs Unplanned Maintenance Between 81% - 100%
6 Asset Register Current / Accurate More than 80%
7 Asset Register Depth Six or more
8 Equipment subjected to Criticality Analysis More than 80%
9 Maintenance Strategy Between 81% - 100%
10 Root Cause Failure Analysis (RCFA) Between 81% - 100%
Question Topic Industry Customer
Best Practice Results
Work Idenification
11 Work Order Coverage Between 81% - 100%
12 Predictive Maintenance (PdM) Program Effectiveness Between 81% - 100%
13 Work Types More than 7
14 Decision Support Between 81% - 100%
15 Operator Care More than 70%
16 Operator Conducting Preventive Maintenance (PM) More than 25%
17 Work Order Priority System Criteria Between 81% - 100%
18 Change Management Between 81% - 100%
19 Work Order Process More than 60%
20 Who Will Do Work Well Between 81% - 100%

Question Topic Industry Customer Question Topic Industry Customer

Best Practice Results
Work Control
Work Execution
21 Planning Accuracy +/- 2%
22 Number of Planners More than 60
23 Scheduling Horizon More than 4 weeks
24 Preventive Maintenance (PM) Schedule Compliance More than 70%
25 Predictive Maintenance (PdM) Schedule Compliance More than 70%
26 Budget Compliance +/- 2%
27 Bill of Materials Between 81% - 100%
28 Standard Job Plans (SJP) & Procedures Between 81% - 100%
29 Work Backlog Less than 3 weeks
30 Overtime Levels Less than 5%
Best Practice Results
31 Work Orders History Between 81% - 100%
32 History Practices More than 80%
33 Maintenance Labor Productivity More than 50%
34 Training Hours per Maintenance Craft Person More than 80 hrs
35 Supervisor to Craftperson Ratio More than 40
36 Total Craft Designations Less than 3
37 Post Maintenance Testing Between 81% - 100%
38 Maintenance Rework Less than 4%

Question Topic Industry Customer

Best Practice Results
Otimization
39 Update Program - Breakdown Maintenance Between 81% - 100%
40 Update Program - PM / PdM Between 81% - 100%

© SKF Group
 Agreed Improvement Recommendations
-#prioritized
Improvement recommendation Agree Y/N Prio H/M/L
1 Asset Management Awareness training for Management Y H
Asset Management Awareness training for Shop Floor people Y H
2 Initiate Spare Part Management and Optimization project Y M
3 Set up Proactive Reliability Maintenance program Y H
4 Perform a Maintenance Strategy Review Y H
5 Review and improve KPIs' Y H
6 Implement MSR results in CMMS Y Res
7 Involve operators in asset care (Operator Driven Reliability) Y M
8 Planning and Scheduling Y M
9 Review and improve PDM program Y L

No, not in line

10 Create standard job plans for all asset management tasks with GM program

11 Start using Maximo for full Work Order Process Y M

12 Develop structured approach for continuous improvement Y H

13 Install reliability team Y L

© SKF Group
 The agreed Road Map
Start today to begin realizing the benefits
Asset management Asset management awareness
awareness training for top training for work force
management

Establish/ organize reliability team

Preventive maintenance pilot area Preventive maintenance 2nd area Preventive maintenance 3rd area Preventive maintenance 4th area

Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance

Strategy Review Strategy Review Strategy Review Strategy Review

Set up Proactive Reliability Maintenance program for critical equipment

Set up structured Root Cause Analysis program

Technology upgrades

Work instructions pilot area of Work instructions 2nd Work instructions

MSR area of MSR 3rd area of MSR

Continuous Improvement – Continuous Improvement – Continuous Improvement – Continuous Improvement

1st year 2nd year 3rd year

© SKF Group
 Potential savings are pockets of opportunities
Maintenance Cost Coffee factory
ERV € 145,000,000
4 processing areas
Maintenance Cost € 4,400,000 Percentage of ERV 3.03%
ERV Best Practice 2.00% Equals € 2,900,000
7 filling & packaging lines
Assumed Goal 2.50% Equals € 3,625,000 Utilities unit
Opportunity € 775,000 300 people

Effect of Unplanned Breakdowns reduction

Missed revenue
# of breakdowns 5,000 Average time 0.30
Tons/hour 0.86 Total missed tons 1,290
Revenue per ton € 21,900 Total Cost of No Prod € 28,251,000
Breakdown reduction 50.00%
Opportunity Cost of No Production reduction € 14,125,500
Cost of maintenance
# people / breakdown` 2 Total time 3,000
Average cost/person € 40 Total personnel cost € 120,000
Breakdown reduction 50.00%
Opportunity Maintenance Cost reduction € 60,000

Spare Part Management and Optimization

ERV € 145,000,000
Spare Part Value € 2,700,000 Percentage of ERV 1.86%
ERV Best Practice 0.30% Equals € 435,000
Assumed Goal 0.75% Equals € 1,087,500
Opportunity € 1,612,500

© SKF Group
 Customer Case
• Improved Reliability of 16 European plants
• Reduce Cost and Inventory
Need • Benchmarking of the plants with each other
• Benchmarking with the industry average and Best in Class

• Client Needs Analysis for all European plants

• RoadMap development to tackle common issues and to drive the improvement
Solution programs

• Identified improvement opportunities

• Defined Roadmap for three to five years to reduce cost
• Insight in cost reduction opportunities
Value • Implementation of Computerized Maintenance Management System
• Reviewed Maintenance Plans based on RCM/FMECA
• Spares Inventory Management and Optimization

© SKF Group
 Plant to Plant Comparison
Plant A Plant B Plant C Plant D …….
1 Maintenance Budget vs ERV Less than 3.2% 3.71% 1.97% Between 5.5%-3.2% Less than 3.2% Less than 3.2% Less than 3.2% Between 9%-5.6% Less than 3.2% Less than 3.2% Less than 3.2% Less than 3.2%
2 Overall Availability More than 93% Between 83% - 86% More than 93% 90.00% Between 87%-93% More than 93% Between 83%-86% More than 93% More than 93% More than 93% Between 83%-86% More than 93%
3
4
Maintenance Cost vs Total Sales
Store Value vs ERV
Less than 3.0%
Less than 0.3%
7.27%
Not applicable
6.46% 6.40%
Between 1.3% - 0.8% 1.3%-0.8%
Between 6%-3%
Between 0.7%-0.3%
Between 6%-3%
Between 1.3%-0.8%
Less than 3.0%
Between0.7%-0.3%
More than 8%
More than 1.3%
Less than 3.0%
Between0.7%-0.3%
Between 8%-7%
Between 1.3%-0.8%
Less than 3.0%
Between0.7%-0.3%
Less than 3%
More than 1.3%
44%
5 Planned vs Unplanned Maintenance Between 81% - 100% 10%-40% No planned work 10%-40% 61%-80% Between 81% - 100% Between 61% - 80% Between 41% - 60% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% 81%-100%
6
7
Asset Register Current / Accurate
Asset Register Depth
More than 80%
Six or more
More than 80%
Four/Five
More than 80%
Four/Five
Less than 50%
One
More than 80%
Six or more
More than 80%
Six or more
More than 80%
Six or more
More than 80%
Four/Five
More than 80%
Six or more
Between 66%-80%
Six or more
More than 80%
Six or more
More than 80%
Four/Five
24%
8 Equipment subjected to Criticality Analysis More than 80% None None None Less than 40% Less than 40% Between 61%-80% Between 40%-60% More than 80% Between 40%-60% Less than 40% Between 61%-80%
9
10
Maintenance Strategy
Root Cause Failure Analysis (RCFA)
Between 81% - 100%
Between 81% - 100%
Between 40% - 60%
Between 61% - 80%
None
Between 81%-100%
None
Between 81%-100%
None
Between 40%-60%
Between 81% - 100%
Between 81% - 100%
None
Between 81% - 100%
None
Between 81% - 100%
Between 81% - 100%
Between 81% - 100%
None
Between 61% - 80%
Less than 40%
Between 81% - 100%
Between 61%-80%
Between 81%-100%
32%
Work Identification
11 Work Order Coverage Between 81% - 100% Between 40% - 60% Between 81%-100% Between 61%-80% Between 81%-100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 61%-80%
12 Predictive Maintenance (PdM) Program Effectiveness Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81%-100% Between 40%-60% Between 81%-100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 61% - 80% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 61%-80%
13
14
Work Types
Decision Support
More than 7
Between 81% - 100%
3
Between 61% - 80%
More than 7
Between 81%-100%
1-2
No decision support
1-2
Between 40%-60%
More than 8
Between 81% - 100%
Between 5-7
Between 81% - 100%
4
Between 81% - 100%
More than 7%
Between 81% - 100%
More than 7
No decision support
3
Between 81% - 100%
5-7
Between 81%-100%
50%
15 Operator Care More than 70% Not measured Not measured Not measured Between 36%-70% More than 70% More than 70% Not applicable Between 36%-70% Not measured Less than 15% Not measured
Between 2%-9%
16
17
Operator Conducting Preventive Maintenance (PM)
Work Order Priority System Criteria
More than 25% Operators don't do PM's
Between 81% - 100% Not applicable
Between 2%-9%
Between 81%-100%
Between 10%-25%
Less than 40% Between 81%-100%
Operators don't do PM's
Between 81% - 100%
Between 10%-25% Operators don't do PM's
Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100%
Between 10%-25% Less than 2% Operators don't do PM's
Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100%
Operators don’t do PM's
Between 61%-80%
15%
18 Change Management Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81%-100% No procedure Between 81%-100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 81% - 100% Between 40% - 60% Between 61% - 80% Between 40%-60%
19
20
Work Order Process
Who Will Do Work Well
More than 60% Not applicable
Between 81% - 100% Not applicable
More than 60%
Not included
Between 40%-50%
Between 81%-100%
More than 60%
Between 81%-100%
More than 60%
Between 81% - 100%
More than 60%
Between 40%-60%
Less than 40%
Not included
More than 60% More than 60%
Between 81% - 100% Not included
More than 60%
Not included
Less than 40%
Between 61%-80%
35%
Work Control
21 Planning Accuracy +/- 2% +/-15% No measurement No measurement +/-15% +/-5% +/-5% +/-25% +/-5% +/-25% No measurement +/-5%
22 Number of Planners More than 25 No designated planners No designated planners No planners No designated planners Between 11-25 More than 25 No designated planners Between 11-25 Between 5-10 No designated planners No designated planners
23 Scheduling Horizon More than 4 weeks More than 4 weeks More than 4 weeks 1-4 weeks
More than 70%
More than 4 weeks
More than 70%
More than 4 weeks 1- 4 weeks More than 4 weeks More than 4 weeks More than 4 weeks More than 4 weeks 1-4 weeks 46%
24 Preventive Maintenance (PM) Schedule Compliance More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% Between 36%-70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70%
25 Predictive Maintenance (PdM) Schedule Compliance More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% Between 15%-35% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70% More than 70%
26
27
Budget Compliance
Bill of Materials
+/- 2%
Between 81% - 100%
+/-2%
Between 10% - 40%
+/- 2%
81%-100%
+/-25%
10%-40%
+/- 2%
81%-100%
+/- 2%
Between 81% - 100%
+/-5%
Between 81% - 100%
Not measured
Less than 10%
+/-15%
Between 81% - 100%
+/-5%
Between 81% - 100%
+/-15%
Between 81% - 100%
+/-2%
10%-40%
29%
28 Standard Job Plans (SJP) & Procedures Between 81% - 100% Less than 40% Between 40%-60% No SJP Less than 40% Between 81% - 100% Between 40% - 60% No SJP's Between 81% - 100% Less than 40% Less than 40% Between 40%-60%
29
30
Work Backlog
Overtime Levels
Less than 3 weeks
Less than 5%
Less than 3 weeks
Between 20%-10%
More than 10 weeks
Between 9%-5%
Between 6-3 weeks
Between 20%-10%
Between 6-3 wks
Less than 5%
Between 6-3 weeks
Less than 5%
6-3 weeks
Between20%-10%
Between 6-3 weeks
Between 9%-5%
Less than 3 weeks
Between 9%-5%
Not measured
Between 9%-5%
6-3 weeks
Less than 5%
Not measured
Between 9%-5%
35%
Work Execution
31 Work Orders History Between 81% - 100% Not applicable Between 81%-100% Between 81%-100% Less than 40% Between 81%-100% Between 61%-80% Between 81%-100% Between 81%-100% Between 40%-60% Between 80%-100% Less than 40%
32
33
History Practices
Maintenance Labor Productivity
More than 80%
More than 50%
Not applicable
Not measured
More than 80%
Not Measured
Less than 30%
Not Measured
More than 80%
Not Measured
More than 80%
More than 50%
More than 80%
Not measured
No history
Not measured
More than 80%
Not measured
Between 60%-80%
Between 41%-50%
No history
Not measured
Less than 30%
Not measured
25%
34
35
Training Hours per Maintenance Craft Person
Supervisor to Craftperson Ratio
More than 80 hrs
More than 40
10-40 hrs
Less than 9
41-69 hrs
less than 9
41-69 hrs
Between 9-17
41-69 hrs
Between 9-17
41-69 hrs
Between 18-40
41-69 hrs
Between 9-17
Less than 10 hrs
Between 9-17
41-69 hrs
Between 18-40
10-40 hrs
Less than 9
70-80 hrs
Less than 9
10-40 hrs
Less than 9
17%
36 Total Craft Designations Less than 3 Between 5-3 Between 5-3 Between 5-3 More than 7 Between 5-3 More than 7 Between 7-6 Less than 3 More than 7 Between 7-6 Between 7-6
37 Post Maintenance Testing Between 81% - 100% Between 40% - 60% Between 81%-100% Less than 40% Less than 40% Between 40%-60% Between 40% - 60% No standards Between 81% - 100% No standards Less than 40% Less than 40%
38 Maintenance Rework Less than 4% Between 6%-4% Not measured Not measured Less than 4%
Between 81%-100%
Less than 4% Between 6%-4% Not measured Less than 4% Not measured Not measured Less than 4% 58%
39 Update Program - Breakdown Maintenance Between 81% - 100% Not applicable Between 81%-100% Between 61%-80% Between 81% - 100% Between 40% - 60% Less than 40% Between 81% - 100% Unknown Between 81% - 100% Less than 40%
40 Update Program - PM / PdM Between 81% - 100% Less than 40% Between 81%-100% Between 61%-80% Less than 40% Between 81% - 100% Between 40% - 60% Less than 40% Between 81% - 100% Between 61% - 80% Between 40% - 60% Between 40%-60%

© SKF Group
Conclusions
 Run
‘til it hurts ?
Operations pushes productivity to the limit. Maintenance
works miracles to keep the equipment running. The result is
too often costly damage to your machine assets….

October 30, 2007 © SKF Group Slide 50

 Benefits for you and your plant

Higher availability

Optimized costs

Longer asset life

Higher reliability

Increase production output

Increase sales revenue and profit

Documented Risk Mitigation

Career reward

© SKF Group
 Enjoy your journey!

© SKF Group
Questions and
Answers