Hello Forum,

Companies invest huge dollars on developing the latest maintenance strategy in order to achieve production targets and minimize risk. They then have time served qualified technicians who regularly perform the maintenance. Yet when it comes to operating the latest equipment the operators don’t need any formal qualifications and in some cases no training whatsoever. All the hard work performed in the maintenance strategy development phase is all too quickly undermined by poor operating practice.

With operations being accountable for 40-50% of plant reliability problems (asset 30-40% and maintenance 10-30%) should companies continue releasing plant operators to the frontline to operate our sophisticated equipment with no formal training requirements? What experiences do other forum members have with skill levels amongst operators?

Cheers - Gary

I’m not sure what the issue is here, but its not fair to run down operators on the basis of some vague unsubstantiated rant.

Quote:
Yet when it comes to operating the latest equipment the operators don’t need any formal qualifications

Since when has a possession of a formal qualification been any guarantee of a proven skill?

Quote:
should companies continue releasing plant operators to the frontline to operate our sophisticated equipment with no formal training requirements?

If you want any sort of sensible response you had better tell us what sort of sophisticated equipment you talking about?

How do we know that your claim for ‘sophisticated’ doesn’t really mean badly designed, user unfriendly and totally pointless?

Hello Buzz,
Thanks for your reply.

My topic was certainly not intended to run down operators, I have worked with some excellent operating staff over the years. In general though, I have witnessed in the UK, NZ and Australia varying levels of operator competencies. Businesses don't appear to take operator skills seriously. When I left the UK, there was a national vocational qualification being offered in process operations which included basic understandings of pressures, temps and flows etc. This appeared to be moving in the right direction.

Would you let somebody drive (operate) your own car without some formal training, or would you hand over the keys and let them attempt to drive. It doesn't matter how sophisticated the vehicle is, the issue is around operator training and competency levels.

Cheers - Gary

Buzz,

The issue I see Gary talking about is the quality of training received by operators.
I can certainly sympathize with Gary’s concerns surrounding operator training. I have witnessed first hand the recruitment of operators who are then given a basic plant induction before being responsible for the output of a multi million dollar operation. I believe he made a valid point. Companies don’t appear to take operator skills seriously. This is not the fault of the operators themselves but the companies who continue to recruit without recognizing the requirements of running their own plants.

Bob

Gary/Bob

What exactly are you trying to sell? Do you two work together or for some organisation that sells “reliability” to industry?


Quote
Would you let somebody drive (operate) your own car without some formal training,

Um no…that would be a safety issue wouldn’t it?.


Quote:
The issue I see Gary talking about is the quality of training received by operators.

Its still very vague - what exactly is the problem, what are the consequences and what proposals can you put forward to overcome this 'problem'?

Hello Buzz,

You do seem to be “lightyears” away, and if I wanted to sell something I would go to ebay! (ha-ha)

“What exactly is the problem, what are the consequences and what proposals can you put forward to overcome this 'problem'?

“What exactly is the problem” -
The problem I am attempting to discuss here is the difference between maintenance driven reliability and operating for reliability. In my experience companies tend to focus more on maintenance reliability rather than looking at operating for reliability.

“What are the consequences” -
The consequences for not performing either are the same. Unplanned outages, increased safety risk, higher business costs etc etc.

“What proposals can you put forward to overcome this 'problem'?” -
I don’t have a proposal to overcome operational reliability issues but the very least I would expect to see some education and engagement of operating staff. This would help operational people understand the issues surrounding what they do and don’t do and how it impacts the reliability of equipment.

Bob is correct and one of the issues I am trying to address here is the quality of training received by operators but it’s not the only one. Maybe my thread should have been named “operating for reliability”

Do others come across operational reliability issues and if so how are they addressed?

Cheers - Gary

I will state a grinder operating problem I have seen that was an operating reliability problem.

1. The operators were compensated by the amount of work they performed so they obviously were driven to push out as much as they could.

2. The operators were not trained very thoroughly on the equipment and how to prolong the life of the grinding wheels and even though the operators were trained somewhat on quality standards for the parts they were not trained well on how to achieve those quality standards.

3. The result of the lack of training as far as equipment reliability was concerned was the premature failure of the grinding stones and the belt. The operators would jam the products in the grinder trying to grind quickly. This would cause uneven wear, generate excessive heat, and sometimes damage the stones. Also, sometimes the excessive force created too much stress on the belt causing premature failure.

4. The stones traveled at high speeds so the smallest nonconformities would cause excessive vibration.

5. The end result was a lot of downtime replacing stones and belts and the subsequent balancing that had to be performed.

There are many other examples I have seen because of the lack of training on operating reliability.

Hope that helps.

Gary - interesting topic - let me wade in here.
I notice a trend now towards employing trades people in dual roles as both operators and maintainers - this of course ups the skill level and "mechanical regard" for the machinery and also means operations looks after the equipment. I guess the other way is to encourage operators who have a mechanical apptitude to study for a trade qualification - I have seen some successful examples of this too - however we can be dealing with older (more mature) operators in a lot of instances who don't aspire to train more than they need to - and in our case a lot of our operators who have been here for a while are simply doing what they have to and waiting for retirement.

I can see though a new generation of operator coming through - younger and more enthusiastic - wanting to upskill (perhaps not having had the opportunity) or a lot who have attained high school diplomas and are of a much higher aptitude than the older ones.

Perhaps these operators will become the optimum mix of mechanical/operational hybrid we are looking for/requiring.

Mike.

Thanks guys for the contributions to my topic. I believe as reliability professionals we should be focusing on both operating and maintaining for reliability.
May you all have a safe and enjoyable festive season and all the best for a healthy and prosperous 2008.

Cheers - Gary

Hey guys I am new to this and I am 30 years old. I help run the reliability programs at a couple of plants and deal with the operators. I work with on site Electricians and the on site maintance workers. I see falts in all groups But your right Gary I see operators pushing the start button because a motor or somthing shut down and they are tring to get it started. So they just keep hiting the start button until some thing blows up. They don't go out and take a look at what is happend and why the unit shut down. Then the other trades get called in to try and solve the problem when alot of times it is simple and with a little training and self motavation it could have been fixed. Any way hope every body has a nice holiday and stay safe out there.

Maybe we see things a little differently. Our facility is operated under a RCM maintenance regime. For us, all personnel that are assigned to facility receive training and are expected to achieve a certain level of competency based on their particular discipline.

As mentioned earlier, for the most operators were not expected to be trained to the same level that was required for the maintenance personnel or even have the same competency for their specific discipline. However, for our facility all personnel, as stated earlier will be trained, expected to display the required competency and participate in follow up training that may be required.

For our operations, the operators are our first line of defense and play a very large part of ensuring production efficiency (reliability) is achieved and maintained over the life of the facility. We have gone to great lengths in providing our people the appropriate tools for job to ensure equipment reliability. That has not only included skills training to enable the people, operator and technician alike but also behavioral training, safety training, etc.

Regards,
Mike