Maximizing Maintenance
Operations for Profit
Optimization:
The RCM Benchmarking System
Establishing a Strategy for Profit-Centered Maintenance
Organization:
PETROXEP
SAINT PAUL REFINERY
By
INGEMAM
(Society of Maintenance Engineering,
University of Seville, Spain)
Carlos Parra
February 2003
INGEMAN Best Practice Systems
(Draft for comment, Rev-1B, February 2002)
1. Introduction
A fully utilized RCM software management system to support the business of
maintenance is an essential information technology tool. Effective physical asset
management is also a mission-essential total business management requirement.
Also the lack of integration with higher level or even parallel financial, accounting,
procurement, inventory or timekeeping systems can waste valuable technical and
administrative resources. This report introduces the benchmarking tool and the
improvement process for your current information technology The RCM
Benchmarking System. This tool is introduced as a means to evaluate the effective
of the current RCM implementation, to define functional gaps and to define how to
enhance current use, to help upgrade functional gaps. It is also a methodology to
help develop and justify a replacement strategy. The RCM Benchmarking System
was developed by SMRP and The Maintenance Excellence Institute and is to be
used with The Scoreboard for Maintenance Excellence. It is used to evaluate the
utilization of existing RCM software. It is designed as a methodology for
developing a benchmark rating of your software (Class A, B, C, or D). It is not
designed to evaluate the functionality of various software nor is it intended to
compare vendors. The system provides a methodology for developing a benchmark
rating of your existing RCM software to determine how well this tool is supporting
best practices and the total maintenance process. It can also be used as a method to
measure the future success and progress of a software system implementation that is
now being installed. Maintenance best practices are the key and the RCM is the
information technology tool that links it all together. The RCM Benchmarking
INGEMAN Best Practice Systems
(Draft for comment, Rev-1B, February 2002)
System, include a total of 10 evaluation items for benchmarking your RCM software
(see table 1).
Table 1. RCM software benchmarking rating scale
RCM SOFTWARE BENCHMARKING Score
ITEMS TO EVALUATE 5 10 15 20
: Study of the operational context and
hierarchies of systems/ subsystems is used
: FMECA analysis is proposed
C: A logic decision tree is used
D: Failures modes and effects codes are used
to track trends for reliability improvement
E: Downtime costs due to failure mode is
measured and documented in the software
F: A documented process for planning &
scheduling has been established from RCM
software
G: PM/PdM strategies are introduced directly
in the CMMS
H: Critical and/or capital spares has been
established from RCM software
I: Software provides MTBF, MTTR , failure
trends, LCC and other reliability data
J: Cost improvements due to RCM
implementation have been documented
Total: 0
RCM SOFTWARE BENCHMARKING
RATING SCALE
Class A: 180 - 200 points (90%+)
Class B: 140 - 179 points (70% to 89%)
Class C: 100 - 139 points (50% to 69%)
Class D: 0 - 99 points (up to 49%)
INGEMAN Best Practice Systems
(Draft for comment, Rev-1B, February 2002)
2. Recommended next steps after the Scoreboard RCM Software Benchmarking
After The RCM Benchmarking System evaluation has been completed, a written and
oral report to top leaders will document the results with a presentation of
recommendations and a plan of action. Key areas of the report presentation will help
you to:
Determine Strengths/Weaknesses and priorities for action
Benchmark your RCM implementation
Maximize benefits of RCM implementation
Develop maintenance as a profit center
Define potential savings
Develop recommended plan of action (and implement)
Develop method to measure and validate results from RCM
Finally, what are some of the typical benefits of improved RCM software that could
be missing from your operation?
Improved Work Control: Better work management with improved control of
work requests by craft, monitoring of backlogs, determining priorities, and
scheduling decisions for overtime effectively. Full accountability of craft
time/labor cost to work orders, which accrues to asset history and ensures charge
backs to customers/tenants.
Improved Planning and Scheduling: The systems and procedures to establish a
more effective day-to-day maintenance planning and scheduling process
contribute to improved craft labor utilization and customer service. Better
INGEMAN Best Practice Systems
(Draft for comment, Rev-1B, February 2002)
planning and scheduling with our customers is an important benefit. We must
plan for maintenance excellence because it does not occur naturally.
Improved MRO Materials Management: The means for more effective
management and control of maintenance parts and material inventories.
Information for decisions on inventory reduction is readily available to identify
parts usage, excess inventory levels, and obsolete parts.
Improved Reliability Analysis: The means to track work order and equipment
history data related to types of repairs, frequencies and causes for failure. It
allows maintenance to have key information on failure trends that leads to
eliminating root causes of failures and to improving overall equipment
reliability.
Increased Budget Accountability: Provides for greater accountability for craft
labor and parts/materials through the work order and storeroom inventory
modules. Increased level of control, greater visibility and accountability of the
overall maintenance budget by individual piece of equipment and by using
department or work order. Replacement and renovation decisions for facilities
and other building systems can be supported by cost information from the RCM
software.
Increased Level of Maintenance Information: A major benefit of RCM software
comes from developing the historical database that becomes readily available as
critical maintenance information. An effective RCM software helps turn data
into information you can use to manage maintenance as an internal business.
INGEMAN Best Practice Systems
(Draft for comment, Rev-1B, February 2002)
3. References
B.S. BLANCHARD, D. VERMA, E.L. PETERSON, Maintainability : a Key to
Effective Serviceability and Maintenance Management, John Wiley & Sons, New
York, 1995.
BRIGGS, DAVID, "Totale Productive Maintenance an Reliability Centred
Maintenance, Competing or Complementary, Maintenance : the quarterly journal
for all those concerned with the maintenance and servicing of physical asssets",
Vol. 9 N4, September 1994.
EN 50126, "Railway applications The specification and demonstration of
Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety (RAMS)", CENELEC, 2000.
HARRIS John, MOSS Bob, "Practical RCM analysis and its information
Requirements", Maintenance, 9-4, septembre 1994.
KNOWLES Michael, "A Systematic Approach to Managing Risk - RCM",
Maintenance, 10-1, janvier 1995.
MOUBRAY John, "Reliability Centred Maintenance RCM II", Butterworth-
Heinnemann Ltd., Oxford, 1991.
MOUBRAY John, "Maintenance Management - A New Paradigm", Maintenance,
Volume 11, n 1, 1996.
MSG-3, Maintenance programme document MSG-3 Revision 2, Air Transport
Association of America, 1993.
NAVAIR, Guidelines For The Naval Aviation Reliability-Centered Maintenance.
This manual supersedes NAVAIR 00-25-403. Direction of commander, Naval Air
Systems command, 1996.
RYAN Vincent, "Getting Started in RCM", , Maintenance, 7-4, dcembre, 1992.
INGEMAN Best Practice Systems
(Draft for comment, Rev-1B, February 2002)
SANDTORV Helge, RAUSAND Marvin, "RCM - Closing the loop between
Design Reliability and Operational Reliability", Maintenance, 6-1, mars 1991.
SMITH A M., "Reliability Centred Maintenance", MC GRAW HILL, New York,
1993.
INGEMAN Best Practice Systems
(Draft for comment, Rev-1B, February 2002)
4. Author
Parra, Carlos
[email protected]
www.confiabilidadoperacional.com
INGEMAN Best Practice Systems
(Draft for comment, Rev-1B, February 2002)
