Jump to navigation. Oil, Mining, and Chemical industry incidents over the past several years have focused new light on the need for improved Asset Integrity Management practices. In this session you will develop an outline of a data collection plan for use in helping develop a FRACAS for your organization. Good failure codes are essential to being able to analyze failure data to look for patterns of failure across the organization.

Author:Kasar Monos
Language:English (Spanish)
Published (Last):6 March 2004
PDF File Size:18.20 Mb
ePub File Size:20.80 Mb
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

Edwards Deming, PhD How good is your organization at identifying failures? Of course you see failures when they occur, but can you identify when recurring failures are creating serious equipment reliability issues? While this is not wrong, I prefer to either not see the failure in the first place, or at the least, to reduce the failures to a controllable level. One poll was conducted recently covering 80 large companies.

Shockingly, none of these companies were capturing the data required to understand and control equipment failures. Answer the following questions honestly before you go any further to see if you have any problems with identifying failures and effectively eliminating or mitigating their effects on total process and asset reliability. Many times, the cost of unreliability remains unknown because the causes of unreliability are so many. Whether you want to point the finger at maintenance, production operations or engineering, each functional area plays a role in unreliability.

Here are a few examples of those losses: 1. Ineffective or no commissioning procedures. See Figures 2 and 3. If you have ever seen equipment break down or not running to rate immediately after a shutdown, you know what we are talking about.

Eliminating unreliability is a continuous improvement process much like the Proactive Work Flow Model in Figure 4. The Proactive Workflow Model illustrates the steps required in order to move from a reactive to a proactive maintenance program.

Implementing the Proactive Work Flow Model is the key to eliminating failures. All of the steps and processes have to be implemented in a well managed and controlled fashion to get full value out of the model. These are requirements not options to ensure that you have a sustainable proactive workflow model. You cannot have continuous improvement until you have a repeatable, disciplined process.

The objective of the Proactive Work Flow Model is to provide discipline and repeatability to your maintenance process. There are fundamental items you must have in place to insure that you receive the results you expect. From the RCA, we determine maintenance strategy adjustments needed to predict or prevent failures. Performance monitoring after we make the strategy adjustments may find that new failure modes not covered by your strategy occur.

You can now make a new failure code to track the new failure mode so additional failures can be tracked and managed when you review work order history. You can see this is a continuous improvement loop which never ends. The foundational elements of an effective FRACAS are an effective validated equipment hierarchy, criticality analysis, failure modes analysis, and equipment maintenance plans. FRACAS Checklist: Equipment Hierarchy should be built and validated so that similar failures on like equipment can be identified across an organization.

Criticality Analysis is developed and validated so that equipment criticality is ranked based on Production Throughput, Asset Utilization, Cost, Environment, and Safety. Equipment Maintenance Plans are developed on all critical equipment to prevent or predict a failure. In order to eliminate failures, one needs to ensure this is a successful first step. Now it is time to perform a Root Cause Failure Analysis on this common thread of failures.

Once the hierarchy is established you can find similar failures in one area of an operation or across the total operation. After a thorough analysis you will find that most failures come from a small amount of equipment. Asset Criticality Analysis — Everyone says they have identified their critical equipment. But, in many cases, equipment criticality could change based on how upset people are about an equipment problem or because people are confused about what consequences associate to failure and the probability it will occur if we manage equipment reliability effectively.

The purpose of the Asset Criticality Analysis is to identify which equipment has the most serious potential consequences on business performance, if it fails. The Intercept Ranking Model illustrates this process Figure 7. I like using a scale of because all assets are not necessarily equal. Figure 8 shows the 4-Way Prioritization Model for planning and scheduling. Identify what equipment is most likely to negatively impact business performance because it both matters a lot when it fails and it fails too often.

The resulting Relative Risk Number is used to identify assets that are candidates for reliability improvement. A consistent definition for equipment criticality needs to be adopted and validated in order to ensure the right work is completed at the right time. This is the key to the elimination of failures.

Identification of Failure Modes — The goal of most maintenance strategies is to prevent or predict equipment failures. Equipment failures are typically caused by the catastrophic failure of an individual part.

These parts develop defects, and when left alone, those defects lead to the ultimate catastrophic failure of the part. The primary goal of an effective Preventive PM program is to eliminate the cause and prevent the failure from occurring. In addition, many program tasks are designed to maintain regulatory compliance. Many companies have PM programs.

However, many of the tasks in them do not address specific failure modes. For example: An electric motor with roller bearings has specific failure modes which can be prevented with lubrication. The next question may be why you had Inadequate Lubrication. The Inadequate Lubrication could be identified as a result of no lubrication standard being established for bearings. The best way to identify failure modes is to use a facilitated process.

Put together a small team consisting of people knowledgeable about the equipment, train them thoroughly on the concept of part-defect-cause, and go through the basic equipment types in your facility such as centrifugal pumps, piston pumps, gearboxes, motors, etc..

You will find that a relatively small number of failure codes will cover a lot of failure modes in your facility. The failure modes developed during this exercise can later become the basis for the failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis that takes place during Reliability-Centered Maintenance RCM projects.

The problem is that most companies do not have the data to identify a major problem on multiple assets No data in equals no effective failure reports out. Unless, of course, the defect is identified early enough in the failure mode. So, a Maintenance Strategy is a prescriptive plan to keep, preserve, or protect an asset or assets. However, RTF is used only if, based on thorough analysis, it is identified as the best solution for specific equipment to optimize reliability at optimal cost.

Less invasive maintenance is preferred to more invasive maintenance. This is one of the fundamental concepts of any well-defined maintenance strategy. Specific maintenance strategies are designed to mitigate the consequences of each failure mode. As a result, maintenance is viewed as a reliability function instead of a repair function.

Saying this means Predictive Maintenance or Condition Monitoring is the best solution because it is mainly noninvasive. Knowing that both systemic problems and operating envelope problems produce the same type of defects, a maintenance strategy that merely attempts to discover the defects and correct them will never be able to reach a proactive state.

Technicians will be too busy fixing the symptoms of problems instead of addressing the root cause. To reach a truly proactive state, the root cause of the defects will need to be identified and eliminated.

Maintenance strategies that accomplish this are able to achieve a step change in performance and achieve incredible cost savings. Maintenance strategies that do not attempt to address the root cause of defects will continue to see lackluster results and struggle with financial performance.

A Maintenance Strategy involves all elements that aim the prescriptive plan toward a common goal. Key parts of a maintenance strategy include Preventive and Predictive Maintenance based on a solid Failure Mode Elimination Strategy, Maintenance Planning consisting of repeatable procedures, work scheduled based on equipment criticality, work executed using precision techniques, proper commissioning of equipment when a new part or equipment is installed, and quality control using Predictive Maintenance Technologies to ensure no defects are present after this event occurs.

The very last part of your maintenance strategy is FRACAS, because it drives the continuous improvement portion of this strategy. Failure reporting can come in many forms. The key is to have a disciplined plan to review failure reports over a specific time period, and then to develop actions to eliminate failure. Asset Health or Percent of Assets with No Identifiable Defect — reported by maintenance management to plant and production management on a monthly basis at least see Figure 9.

An asset that has an identifiable defect is said to be in a condition RED. That is it. It is that simple. If there is an identifiable defect the asset is in condition RED. The definition for defect is: an abnormality in a part which leads to equipment or asset failure if not corrected in time.

Example: the plant has 1, pieces of equipment. Of that number, of them have no identifiable defects. There is an interesting aspect about Asset Health. Once this change is underway, Asset Health, as a metric, becomes what most maintenance managers and plant managers have wanted for a long time — a leading indicator of maintenance costs and business risk. The report to management should include recommendations to improve both metrics and should be measured and posted on a line graph for all to see.

Cost variance must be reported to maintenance and production management on a monthly basis. The report should not be acceptable without a known cause of the variance and a plan to bring it in compliance. This one report can identify common failure threads within your operation which, when resolved, can make a quick impact to failure elimination. There are many more reports that can be used effectively, but will not fit in the space of this article. Bill has over 30 years of experience in Maintenance Engineering and Management.

He has successfully implemented maintenance improvement programs in a variety of manufacturing and production facilities. He has provided training and reliability consulting services to petroleum, process, mining, and defense industries in the United States, Mid-East, and Europe. Bill has published articles in a variety of internationally recognized maintenance publications, and has presented papers on the practical application of Weibull Analysis at several internationally attended Maintenance and Reliability Conferences.

You can contact Bill at bkeeter gpallied. Ricky has over 30 years experience in maintenance as a maintenance manager, maintenance supervisor, maintenance engineer, maintenance training specialist, maintenance consultant and is a well known published author.

Ricky has worked with maintenance organizations in hundreds of facilities, industrial plants, etc, world wide in developing reliability, maintenance and technical training strategies.

Prior to joining Allied Reliability in , Ricky worked as a professional maintenance employee for Exxon Company USA, Alumax this plant was rated the best in the world for over 18 years , Kendall Company, and Hercules Chemical providing the foundation for his reliability and maintenance experience. Ricky has also written for several magazines during the past 20 years on technical, reliability and maintenance subjects.


What’s the FRACAS?

After all most organizations have a PM program and some form of a planning and scheduling program right? The key difference between those that do is their ability to use their failure data and systematically eliminate defects and issues from the processes and equipment. To eliminate the defects and issues, the organization needs to collect meaningful data to analyze and act on. Typically it is to used to build a historical database of failures to drive reliability engineering work and equipment improvements. So why is it that most organizations struggle with one? Also, the system may be overly complex.


FRACAS: An Overview

FRACAS is a process that gives organizations a way to report, classify and analyze failures, as well as plan corrective reactions in response to those failures. A failure reporting, analysis and corrective action system FRACAS is a process that gives organizations a way to report, classify and analyze failures, as well as plan corrective reactions in response to those failures. Software is often used to implement a FRACAS system to help manage multiple failure reports and produce a history of failure with corresponding corrective actions, so recorded information from those past failures can be analyzed. The closed-loop process is a disciplined and focused approach that detects and solves issues in the design, development and production stages. It does this through multiple fundamental tasks, including recording and capturing data and information about failures; identifying and prioritizing failures; and determining, implementing and verifying corrective actions to prevent failure recurrence. A FRACAS also provides important information from failure analysis and corrective actions for reliability data reports. Report summaries for things like incident counts contain valuable reliability and quality data.

Related Articles