I am looking for input on PdM specifice KPI's not the ones used at the Reliability Program level, but PdM specific. Some of what I look at are:

Cost Savings of PdM find vs. run to failure.

Pdm Program efficiency which is the Pdm program costs/total cost savings. (percentage)

Lost production ratio which is a ratio of time to perform total replacement vs time to repair.

Cost efficiency which is cost savings/cost of replacement if run to failure.

Cost per data point which is all program costs including training, travel, equip amort, manpower/ avg. number of data points. This one is kind of out there but was requested.

What do some of the rest of you do to justify your existance?

From Terry Wireman's Developing Performance Indicators for Managing Maintenance Book

Hours of PdM as a percentage of total maintenance hours

Same for cost

Savings KPIs
1) Increased Equipment Uptime or downtime avoidance cost

2) Increased Equipment Capacity or increased performance of the equipment (not uptime but performance efficiency)

3) Decreased Maintenance Expense (making a planned repair is less expensive)


After a PdM program is in place

Current maintenance cost versus maintenance cost prior to PdM program

Decreased breakdown frequency

The book goes into more detail and is just out in its second edition.


Good luck

Terry O

Dear Mr Hatfield,

You may find some interesting points within my recent book The Maintenance Scorecard

I suggest that prior to measuring the predictive maintenance program in an effort at justification, there is a need to understand why it has been established in the first place.

Maintainers often rush to plug in traditionl metrics in response to a new need, however any activity that we are doing within the maintenance effort needs to be measured against its contribution to company performance.

Provided that the activity is adequate to begin with,(Eg technically able to assit us) most activities are justified for two specific reasons. First cost-effectiveness whereby it is less costly, over the long term, to perform the activity than to not perform the activity taking into account effects of productivity and other secondary or indirect costs.

Second is cost/benefit where the percieved benefit outwieghs the cost of performing the activity. (Most likely in safety or environmental areas as well as in promoting capital spending)

This is the starting point I would suggest. If the CM activity was selected for cost effectiveness purposes then measures directed at proving the ongoing cost effectiveness of this, as opposed to not doing it, would be a good start. (Taking in the full costs of doing the work as you pointed out above)

If it is int he cost/benefit scenario then a measure of how this action has delivered the promised benefit would be most adequate. (Again traditional metrics in this case would not work because your particular case for implementation will be unique)

Other measures of effectiveness would be the measure of monitored failure modes that are not predicted in time to take action.

It is easy to fall into the traditional metrics trap, however as Einstein pointed out "Things should be as simple as possible, but no simpler". Within the field of metrics I believe there is a strong need to generate your own metrics and measures based on what the activity is designed to achieve for your particular enterprise or need.

As a side note, the term KPI is widely used however often what people are actually referring to is just measures or metrics. A Key Performance Indicator is the indicator that represents the overall performance of the equipment, team or area, within a particular strategic theme. This is then supported by a range of other indicators or measures.

Hope this is of some assistance.

Regards

Daryl Mather
www.strategic-advantages.com

This message has been edited. Last edited by: <Ozgipsy>,