STREAMLINED RCM: A Critical Perspective – Part 2
- Kleber Siqueira
- Oct 27, 2024
- 2 min read
Reliability-centered Maintenance (RCM) plays a fundamental role in supporting asset management systems, as outlined by ISO 55000. By aligning the reliability of industrial assets with both short- and long-term corporate objectives, RCM directly connects asset performance to the core business value chain, safeguarding critical industrial functions that drive revenue.
Despite these clear advantages, many organizations still face challenges due to organizational gaps, which I’ve discussed in previous posts. These challenges often lead to attempts to reduce the time and resources needed for a thorough RCM process, resulting in what’s known as ‘streamlined’ RCM. However, it’s important to note that no streamlined RCM methodology complies with SAE RCM standards. Furthermore, RCM is not merely about creating maintenance plans—it’s about developing comprehensive reliability strategies that extend far beyond traditional maintenance.
In my previous post, I covered Retroactive Approaches. Today, I’ll dive into Generic Analysis Approaches.
Generic Analysis Approaches
This approach involves applying the analysis performed on one system to other, technically identical systems. While this may sound efficient, it must be approached with extreme caution due to the following reasons:
Different operating contexts: Even technically identical systems can require vastly different maintenance programs if they operate in different contexts.
"One size fits all" maintenance: Generic analyses often rely on a uniform approach to maintenance tasks, significantly reducing the likelihood of acceptance by those responsible for executing the tasks.
For this approach to be viable, it’s crucial to ensure that the operating context, functions, performance standards, failure modes, failure consequences, and the skills of operators and maintainers are all effectively identical before applying a maintenance policy from one asset to another.
Unfortunately, 'streamlined' RCM thinking often assumes that identical (i.e., generic) reliability strategies can be applied across systems. One common mistake is using generic tasks suggested by component manufacturers without considering the operating context. For instance, using a redundant system designed as a standby in a duty role may increase operational costs (OPEX) and reduce the intended reliability of the redundant function. Overlooking key functions in such scenarios can even result in catastrophic consequences.
It’s worth repeating that the functions and performance standards of an asset are defined during the engineering phase of its life cycle. If the current operating context necessitates modifications, the appropriate course of action is often a redesign, not merely adjusting maintenance tasks. Failing to recognize this can lead to undesirable events that threaten safety, the environment, quality, and output.
In my next post, I’ll discuss the use of generic lists of failure modes.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and comments!
#AssetManagement #COO #CAMO #Maintenance #Reliability #RiskManagement #HighRiskIndustries #OperationalExcellence #CorporateStrategy #Leadership
Comments