Embed Size (px)
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.
