Reliability and Availability Levers.

1) What levers are available to control/influence Reliability and Availability?
2) Should they all be implemented at the same time or one at a time?
3) Are some far more important than others, or do they all need equal attention to achieve “best” results at the “least” cost?

These are fairly broad questions, but I would like to avoid discussion on organizational issues such as departmental structures, KPI’s, planning and scheduling, management of change, sustaining processes, computerized maintenance management software, etc. Additionally I would assume that continuous improvement exists for any lever.

So far I have “thought” of four levers:

1. RCM *Analysis (including RCA’s, predictive monitoring, condition based monitoring)

2. Availability *Analysis (including spared equipment and spare parts)

3. Maintenance Quality *Analysis

4. Redesign/Projects?

*Analysis – I make the assumption that the results of analysis are implemented using the organizational systems; this requires the departmental structures, the KPI’s, the planning/scheduling, the sustaining processes, the management of change, etc.

I wonder how everyone will interpret the initial post?

For Example:

When some one reads “Maintenance Quality” will they see TQM or will they see Behaviours that increase or decrease the probability of error in a maintenance task or will they see both? Or will they see this as an organizational issue not related to Levers that influence or control Reliability and Availability?

When some one reads RCM do they see the next three levers as included in RCM?

I look forward to the replies. They should be varied and interesting as we all have different perspectives and understandings of these words.

Here’s an example of a applying the four previously mentioned levers. From this example one may conclude that all the levers should be used at the same time to lower risk (achieve the better results at a lower cost). One may also reason that the levers must be used in a specific order.

RCM type analysis
1) Perform some sort of root cause/fault tree/dominant failure mode analysis
2) Develop probabilities and consequences for each of the dominant failure modes
3) Develop preventative strategies to reduce the probability of high consequence events
• Condition based, Time based activities, Run to failure expectations
4) Compile the new probabilities and consequences of failures

Availability type analysis: For those components that still have a high residual risk after RCM analysis or those components with condition based monitoring activities
5) Develop an availability strategy (spare parts, overtime, other)
• Is loss of availability driven by lack of warning time to failure and/or the subsequent long lead-time to acquire resources?
6) Develop an availability strategy for online spared equipment (50:50, 90:10, 100:0)
• Is loss of availability driven by not taking into account the dominant failure modes/failure pattern/failure rate when switching between the main and spare(s)?
7) Compile the new probabilities and consequences of failure

Maintenance Quality type analysis: for those components that still have a high residual risk after RCM and Availability
8) Consider maintenance quality changes to reduce the probability of failures.
9) Compile the residual risks

Projects/Redesign: for those activities with high residual risk
10) Consider RCA analysis on the high residual risks to drive a redesign opportunity.

Consider:
• If Availability is analyzed without an RCM type analysis is it difficult to know which spare parts are required?
• If an RCM analysis is completed without an availability type analysis could the projects budget be overburden where less money could have been spent on acquiring spare parts.

Is there another lever to add into this model that creates a more holistic program that can further reduce residual risk? Where would the new lever fit? Should a lever be removed?
• Projects may create worse situations: “better the devil you know, then the devil you don't”

1. What comparisons would you draw with the Dupont Model: Return on Equity Levers and the levers mentioned above for Reliability and Availability?

ROE = (Net Income / Sales) X (Sales/Assets) X (Assets/Equity), these are the levers taught to many business school attendees as the points one should try to control to keep their balance sheet balanced and their shareholders “happy”. I am not suggesting that Reliability and Availability are core to all business decisions, but they should be apart of the business decisions. Note: the equation above is not meant for reduction by removing Assets and placing Sales over Equity – it has been expanded to show separate business levers in each bracketed set.

For example: if a business is unable to make production because of availability issues, has large amounts of Assets to offset breakdowns and long repairs, or has high maintenance expenses due to poor reliability then one can see that the Return on Equity to Shareholders will suffer.

Should the comparison bring into account the time lag of Reliability and Availability initiatives to aid in upper managements understanding of Reliability. From this comparison one might surmise that Reliability should be a core competence to a business not unlike Finance, Human Resources, Operations, or Marketing. If you cut your marketing budget would you not expect your future sales to decrease? So if you cut your Reliability and Availability Budgets would you not expect your future reliability and availability to decrease thus impacting your future ROE? Should there be a VP of Reliability/Availability? Marketing and reliability/availability budgets are best reduced through strategy as opposed to wholesale cuts. I believe all users of this forum understand the difference as budget cuts create short term gains at the expense of longer term performance.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Jaz,

Here are some equipment sustainment levers:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1577/MR157...ailability%20levers'

Selecting the right KPIs:
http://www.mt-online.com/articles/0405meridium.cfm

Josh,

Really appreciate the website addresses and both have very interesting commentary on this subject.