STRATEGIC MAINTENANCE DEVELOPMENT IN - DiVA

Preview:

Citation preview

Mälardalen University Press DissertationsNo. 99

STRATEGIC MAINTENANCE DEVELOPMENTIN MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

Antti Salonen

2011

School of Innovation, Design and Engineering

Mälardalen University Press DissertationsNo. 99

STRATEGIC MAINTENANCE DEVELOPMENTIN MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

Antti Salonen

2011

School of Innovation, Design and Engineering

Copyright © Antti Salonen, 2011ISBN 978-91-7485-010-9ISSN 1651-4238Printed by Mälardalen University, Västerås, Sweden

Mälardalen University Press DissertationsNo. 99

STRATEGIC MAINTENANCE DEVELOPMENT IN MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

Antti Salonen

Akademisk avhandling

som för avläggande av teknologie doktorsexamen i innovation och designvid Akademin för innovation, design och teknik kommer att offentligen

försvaras onsdagen den 1 juni 2011, 10.00 i Filen, Smedjegatan 37, Eskilstuna.

Fakultetsopponent: Professor Pra Murthy, The University ofQueensland, School of mechanical and mining engineering

Akademin för innovation, design och teknik

Mälardalen University Press DissertationsNo. 99

STRATEGIC MAINTENANCE DEVELOPMENT IN MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

Antti Salonen

Akademisk avhandling

som för avläggande av teknologie doktorsexamen i innovation och designvid Akademin för innovation, design och teknik kommer att offentligen

försvaras onsdagen den 1 juni 2011, 10.00 i Filen, Smedjegatan 37, Eskilstuna.

Fakultetsopponent: Professor Pra Murthy, The University ofQueensland, School of mechanical and mining engineering

Akademin för innovation, design och teknik

AbstractIndustrial maintenance is a substantial financial post. The total value of maintenance budgets in Europehas been estimated to be approximately 1500 billion € per year. At the same time, there are indicationsthat about a third of these costs are wasted due to poor planning, overtime costs, inferior use ofpreventive maintenance and so forth. However, the diversity between different types of industry issubstantial.

While the process industry, which is rather vulnerable to disturbances, has a tradition of viewingits maintenance as a strategic resource, the picture is quite different in discrete item manufacturingindustry. Historically, manufacturing industry has had a surplus of finished goods and Work-In-Progress buffers between machinery. Therefore, the manufacturing industry has been able to fulfilits production demand despite unreliable production equipment. In the last few decades, the conceptof lean production has started to spread within the manufacturing industry as a means to improvecompetitiveness. Manufacturing companies apply lean tools such as flow oriented production layout,Just-In-Time production and Demand-Flow-Technology. As a consequence, the vulnerability to systemdisturbances increases and hence, the demand for dependable production equipment increases. Despitethis increasing demand on reliable production equipment, few manufacturing companies work withstrategic maintenance development. One reason for this may be that the existing methods and conceptsfor maintenance development are quite resource demanding.

The main objective with this research is to develop a simple and cost effective approach aimed toformulate, implement, and evaluate maintenance strategies for the manufacturing industry. In five casestudies the following has been studied: (1) The industry’s view on strategic maintenance development,(2) Formulation of maintenance strategies, (3) Implementation of maintenance strategies, (4) Cost of PoorMaintenance, and (5) Results from strategic maintenance development.

As a result from this research, a process for the formulation of maintenance strategies has beendeveloped. Further, a number of driving forces and obstacles, that influence the implementation ofmaintenance strategies, have been identified. The concept of Cost of Poor Maintenance has beenintroduced as a means for evaluating the financial contribution of maintenance. Finally, three years ofstudies in three companies has shown substantial benefits from strategic maintenance development.

ISBN 978-91-7485-010-9ISSN 1651-4238

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

VIII

IX

X

XI

XII

1

1.1

2

3

1.1.1

1.2

1.2.1

4

1.2.2

1.3

5

1.4

6

7

2.1

8

Figure 1: The researcher's approach, compared with the approaches presented by Arbnor and Bjerke (1994). The figure shows how the different approaches relate to the scientific views of knowledge as being either explanatory- or understanding- focused.

UnderstandingKnowledgeExplanatoryKnowledge

(Hermeneutics)(Explanatics)

(3) The actors’ approach

The approach of the researcher

(1) The analytical approach

(2) The systems approach

9

2.2

10

2.3

Figure 2: The performed research, structured in accordance with the Design Research Methodology framework, adapted from Blessing and Chakrabarti (2009).

Research clarification

Descriptive study III

Prescriptive study I

Descriptive study I

Literatureanalysis

Empirical data analysis

AssumptionExperienceSynthesis

Empirical data analysis

Basic means

The need for strategicmaintenance development

The industry’s view on strategicmaintenance development

Formulation of maintenance strategies

Results from strategicmaintenance development

Main outcomesStages

Descriptive study IIEmpirical data analysis

Implementation of maintenance strategies

Prescriptive study IIAssumptionExperienceSynthesis

The Cost of PoorMaintenance

11

Figure 3: Design research methodology in relation to research questions and included papers.

RQ 1

RQ 3

RQ 2

Research clarification

Descriptivestudy 1

Prescriptivestudy 1a

Prescriptivestudy 1b

Descriptivestudy 3

Prescriptivestudy 2

Descriptivestudy 2

Paper I Paper III

Paper II

Paper IV

Paper V

12

Table 1: Research structure

Stage Company Focus of the study Data sources RQ Paper

RC

N/A

The need for strategic maintenance development

Literature

1, 2, 3

I II III IV V

DS 1

A B C D E F

View on strategic maintenance Factors, strategically important for maintenance The use of maintenance performance indicators Sourcing of maintenance

Interviews Direct observations Documents

1 I

PS 1a

C

Usability of consensus method for the identification of maintenance performance measures

Interviews Participant observations 1 II

PS 1b

A B C

Development and test of the process for the formulation of maintenance strategies

Participant observations Documents Workshop

1 II

DS 2

A B C

Driving forces for strategy implementation Obstacles for strategy implementation

Interviews Survey 2 III

PS 2

A B C

Usability of the concept Cost of Poor Maintenance

Participant observations Workshop 3 IV

DS 3

A B C

Overall KPI-development during the project Experiences from working with structured maintenance development

Interviews Documents

1,2,3 V

13

2.3.1

2

2.3.2

14

15

16

17

2.3.3

2.3.4

18

2.3.5

2.3.6

19

2.4

2.4.1

20

2.4.2

21

2.4.3

22

23

Figure 4: The main areas of literature studies in relation to the research questions.

RQ 1Formulation of

maintenance strategies

RQ 3Financial contribution of maintenance strategies

RQ 2Implementation of

maintenance strategies

Maintenance

Strategy

Strategy implementation

Performance measurement

24

3.1

3.1.1

Production

Maintenance

Maintenance demand

Potential production capacity

Primary production input

Primary production output

Figure 5: The relationship between Production and Maintenance (Gits, 1994).

25

3.1.2

Maintenance

Preventive Maintenance

Corrective Maintenance

Predetermined Maintenance

Condition based Maintenance

Scheduled, continuous, or on request

Scheduled Deferred Immediate

Before a detected fault After a detected fault

Figure 6: Overview of different maintenance approaches (SS-EN 13306, 2001).

26

3.1.3

27

4 The original reference (Japan Institute of Plant Maintenance, 1996) has not been available for review.

28

Figure 7: Terotechnology model, from Coetzee (2004).

3.1.4

Design equipment

Establish technical

specification

Procure Equipment

Install CommissionOperate and

MaintainReplace

Feedback installation and commissioning experiences

Feedback operating and maintenance experiences

29

Management planning

Management Measurement

Maintenance plan

Maintenance operations

Operational information

Maintenance history

Long term strategic management

Maintenance audit Performance measurement

Short term operational management

Policy Procedures

Objectives Business plan

Figure 8: The maintenance cycle (Coetzee, 1999).

30

3.1.5

5

5 The original reference (Altmannshoffer, 2006) has not been available for review.

31

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

32

Figure 9: The economic significance of maintenance in Sweden (Ahlmann, 2002).

The economic significance of maintenance in Sweden

Cost Revenue lossesInfluence on the

environment

IndirectDirect IndirectDirect Damage cost

MaintenanceRepairServiceCBMBreak downInspection etc.

Running-inReduced life cycleReject due to poormaintenanceInferior capability

Production lossesSales lossesLoss of market share

Quality drawbackDelivery delayLoss of Good will

Unstable purifying filteringdevices, unreliable process control, automatic control and insufficient safety devices dueto poor maintenance

Can be calculatedto 114 billion Swedish krona

Currently unknown butincreasingly growing costsestimated to 15-25 billion Swedish krona

Can be estimated to about62 billion Swedish krona

The current total economic significance of maintenancein Sweden = 190 – 200 billion Swedish krona/year

33

34

3.2

35

3.2.1

3.2.2

36

o

o

o

o

37

o

o

o

o

o

o

3.2.3

Figure 10: A Business-centered maintenance methodology (Kelly, 2006).

Business objective

Maintenance

objective

Function

Life plans

Preventive

schedule

Workload

Resource

structure Budget forecast

Work

Planning system

Administrative

structure

Maintenance

control

Correct as

necessary

The strategic thought process

Failure characteristics

Safety requirements

Longevity requirements

asset aquisition policy

Plant structure

Production

requirements

Stores

policy

Personnel

policy

Production objective

Plant layout

UnionsContract labor availability

38

Figure 11: Factors influencing maintenance objective setting (Kelly, 2006).

Maintenance objective

Corporate objective

Plant output factors

Desired plant-operating pattern

Desired output

(availability; tons of product per

period, etc.)

Desired product quality

Plant safety factors

Plant life factors

(longevity)

Other plant factors

Plant energy usage

Plant ‘shine’

(cleanliness and tidiness)

Maintenance resources

(men, spares, tools,

information)

39

Figure 12: The range of maintenance policy sectors and their practices (Wilson, 1999)

Maintenance strategy

Benchmarking

Aims & Objectives

Change Asset strategy

Targets

Policies

Practices

Asset management

support

Life cycle

Computer systems

Asset maintenance management

E-collaboration

Condition based (expert)

Condition monitoring

Control

Spares

Shutdowns

Environment

Quality

Work

Contracting

Planning

Employment

Planning

Structure

Planning

Budgeting

Provisioning

People development

Team working

Roles

Flexibility

Skills

TPM

Activities

Criticality

RCM documentation

Design out

Life-cycle

CBM

Audits of performance and strategy

SYSTEMS ORGANIZATION

40

3.3

3.3.1

41

3.3.2

3.3.3

6 The original reference (Geraerds, 1990)has not been available for review

42

43

44

3.4

3.4.1

3.4.2

45

46

47

3.5

48

49

CHAPTER 4

4.1

4.1.1

50

4.1.2

4.1.3

4.1.4

51

4.2

52

4.3

Figure 13: A schematic view of the maintenance strategy formulation work-process, Appended Paper II, Salonen (2010).

Company vision and

mission

Company’s strategic goals

Strategic goals of

maintenance

Strategic performance

indicators

OverallGap-analysis

S.W.O.T.

Strategic development

plan

Strategic goals

of production

Maintenancestrategy

53

Figure 14: The relationship between goals and measures, used by the maintenance and production departments, and the company’s overall goals, adapted from Salonen and Bengtsson (2008).

7 The concept of MTO originates in the Swedish nuclear power industry and is the Swedish equivalent to the

English term “Human factors.” Its aim is to include human and organizational aspects within the technological

aspects of safety (Rollenhagen, 1997).

MissionVisionGoals

Goals that affectmaintenance

Reliability

Measures that affectmaintenance

Goals, relating to production

Effectiveness

Goals, relating to management

Ef f iciency

Measures of effectiveness

Measures of efficiency

MAINTENANCEPRODUCTION

COMPANY

54

Figure 15: Factors identified as strategic for maintenance, mapped according to Man, Technology, Organization, MTO, adapted from Paper II, Salonen (2010).

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

TechnologyMan Organization

Competence

Work hours

Work force

Organization

Sourcing

Maintenance technology

Information systems

Material resources

Maintenance policies

Maintenance concepts

Spare parts handling

Maintenance related measures

Communication

Financial considerations

Specialists

Culture

55

4.4

Table 2: Driving forces and obstacles, identified in Descriptive study 2. DF indicates a Driving Force, while Ob indicates an Obstacle.

Factor Company A Company B Company C

1. Vision and goal setting DF DF DF

2. Leadership Ob/DF DF DF

3. Planning the implementation Ob Ob Ob

4. Resource assignment Ob Ob Ob

5. Training and Education Ob DF Ob/DF

6. Communication Ob/DF DF Ob/DF

7. Culture Ob Ob Ob

8. Outsourced maintenance* (Business relationship)

DF N/A N/A

9. New business strategy* N/A DF N/A

10. New production concept* N/A N/A DF

11. Lack of stakeholder awareness* Ob Ob Ob

* Factors not found in literature study.

56

4.5

57

Figure 16: The proposed Cost of Poor Maintenance model, in which corrective and preventive maintenance are divided into cost of conformance and cost of non-conformance, from Appended Paper IV, Salonen and Deleryd (2011).

Indispensable corrective maintenance:

Corrective Maintenance due to:-Failures with random distribution and no measurable deterioration.-Failures which are not financially justified to prevent.

Valid preventive maintenance:

Preventive Maintenance, necessary to uphold necessary dependability.Improvements intended to increase the reliability of equipment.

Non-accepted corrective maintenance:

Corrective Maintenance due to:-Lack of preventive maintenance-Poorly performed preventive maintenance-Poor equipment reliability

Poor preventive maintenance:

Unnecessary Preventive MaintenancePoorly performed Preventive Maintenance

Cost of Conformance

Cost of Non-conformance

Preventive maintenanceCorrective maintenance

58

Table 3: Categories of costs related to CoPM (Appended Paper IV, Salonen and Deleryd, 2011).

Cost of conformance Cost of non-conformance Costs for

indispensable corrective maintenance

Costs for valid preventive maintenance

Costs for non-accepted corrective maintenance

Costs for poor preventive maintenance

Man-hours for maintenance (including administration) X X X X

Exchange parts X X X X Lubricants X X X X Other material for maintenance, e.g., rags, cleaning solvents, etc.

X X X X

Lost production time X X X X Logistics, e.g., for spare parts or entrepreneurs X

Breakdown-related scrap and/or re-work X X

Scrap and/or re-work due to poor maintenance X

Breakdown-related over-time for recovery production

X X

Speed losses due to poor maintenance X

59

Figure 17: The expected outcome of structured use of the concept of CoPM, from Appended Paper IV, Salonen and Deleryd (2011).

4.6

Cost of conformance

Cost of non-conformance

Cost of conformance

Cost of non-conformance

Cost

Time

60

61

CHAPTER 5

5.1

5.1.1

62

Figure 18: The strategic maintenance development loop, consisting of a main loop from Steps 1 to 4, and feedback loops from Steps 4 to 3, and from Steps 2 to 1, from Appended Paper II, Salonen (2010)

Production strategy

1: Evaluation

•KPI

•Benchmarking•Audit•Etc.

Overall business strategy

2: Strategy formulation

•Aim

•Goal•Components•Responsibilities

•Etc.

3: Implementation

•Tactical/Operational level

•Aim•Action plan•Organization - roles

•Contracts•Etc.

4: Control

•Aim

•Measures•Knowledge feedback•Re-use of experiences

•Etc.

63

5.1.2

5.1.3

64

5.1.4

65

5.2

5.2.1

66

5.2.2

5.3

67

5.4

68

5.5

5.5.1

5.5.2

5.5.3

5.5.4

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

Check the best alternative in the following questions:

1. Which part of maintenance do you belong to? PM CM Team-tech.

2. Do you know the strategic goals of your maintenance? Yes No

3. One goal is to reach a distribution between PM/CM = 80/20.

Does it make sense (On a scale from 1 – 5).

No sense Much sense

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

4. The distribution 80/20 should be reached by the end of 2010.

Is this achievable?

Yes No Don’t know

5. One of your goals is to decrease the stop time for breakdowns (CM).

Does it make sense (On a scale from 1 – 5).

No sense Much sense

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

6. What is a reasonable goal for maximum stop time for CM?

(Please try to set a reasonable goal) h

7. One of your goals is to reach e level of maximum 15 stops per week.

Does it make sense (On a scale from 1 – 5).

No sense Much sense

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

8. The goal of 15 stops per week should be reached by the end of 2010.

Is this achievable?

Yes No Don’t know

9. Is it good to let the operators perform some of the routine PM?

(On a scale from 1 – 5).

Not good Very good

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

10. Operators can perform more PM than today?

Agree (on a scale from 1 – 5).

Don’t agree Fully agree

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

11. How well functioning is your operator maintenance today?

(on a scale from 1 – 5).

Not well Very well

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

12. What do you think about the concept of team-technicians?

(on a scale from 1 – 5).

Not good Very good

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

13How well functioning do you think the concept of team-technicians is today?

(on a scale from 1 – 5).

Not well Very well

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

14. What do you think of the idea of an order-desk?

(on a scale from 1 – 5).

Not good Very good

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

15. How well functioning is the order-desk today?

(on a scale from 1 – 5).

Not well Very well

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

16. How good is the cooperation with maintenance engineering today?

(on a scale from 1 – 5).

Not good Very good

1 2 3 4 5 Don’t know

17. Please rank the three areas that you consider most important for the maintenance

organization to focus on in order to achieve the goals (1= most important, 2 = second

most important, 3 = third most important). Leave the other areas blank.

Methods and tools for diagnostics

Extended PM-program

Extended or improved PM-instructions

Extended operator maintenance

Increased number of team-technicians

Extended spare parts storage

Root cause analysis

CBM

Training of maintenance personnel

Training of operators

Extended service agreements with experts

Guarantee handling

Continuous improvements

Internal knowledge distribution

Other (specify)

18. If you have any other remarks or notions on the subject of maintenance

improvements, please specify here.

Recommended