How to apply RCM as a process and maximize the results
We often talk to customers about the need to treat reliability as a process rather than a project and Asset Strategy Management (ASM) is an effective way to do that.
What we should make clear though, is that moving to a process-driven approach does not necessarily mean throwing out what has worked for you in the past.
In fact, Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) remains a best practice methodology for developing and reviewing maintenance strategies, and contrary to what some may think, it can effectively be applied to all assets, irrespective of criticality.
There is a common approach that advocates generating maintenance plans for assets with different criticality, in different ways.
Quite typically organizations may:
- apply RCM on critical assets,
- apply FMECA or some scaled down RCM approach for medium criticality assets
- apply a template or common plan to low criticality assets
This approach is clearly derived on the basis of RCM requiring too much time and resources to be effectively applied on all assets. However, applying different models to different assets leads to inconsistent and incomplete analysis, unconnected data, and basically confusion as to how maintenance plans should be optimized and evolved.
What’s more, with advancements in technology and a wealth of generic RCM content available, RCM can be easily and effectively applied to all assets. Any other approach is counterintuitive and actually takes more time and leads to lower quality outputs.
Applying RCM everywhere
If you build RCM models for critical assets (or better still have generic ones available to use as a base) then it’s now easy to use that content to generate optimal plans on similar assets with different criticality.
As an example, let’s take a typical AC motor. Almost all organizations would have completed some level of RCM analysis on an AC motor in the past or, if they haven’t, they could at least purchase generic data that documents failure modes along with typical tasks and intervals.
So, if an organization needs to develop a maintenance plan for a new motor, they can leverage this data, regardless of the asset criticality. If applied to a high criticality installation of the motor, the optimal plan would include certain tasks at certain intervals based on the operating context. To apply that same model to a low criticality installation is even easier– in most cases all that’s required is updating the effects of the failure to represent a lower impact. This change will mean that some tasks will need to be done less frequently or perhaps not at all.
Expanding this concept out, if an RCM model is complete it will contain the potential failure modes, along with potential tasks. Applying the model to assets with different criticalities generally results in different tasks being completed at different intervals. Any other changes based on specific operating context are the same with this rapid RCM approach as they would be using different methodologies.
The main difference and the benefit of using RCM as a basis for maintenance plan development across all asset criticalities is that it supports a consistent planning structure across an organization and provides a solid foundation to continually evolve plans and ensure ongoing alignment to operating context.
Wrapping a process around RCM
RCM is often seen to be a costly exercise, but the real issue is that most organizations fail to maximize the benefits. They carry out an RCM project, create new or revised maintenance plans, and then load the plans into their EAM or CMMS where they remain untouched until the next project.
What organizations should do is review and adjust those maintenance plans on an ongoing basis. This is where having a structured approach like ASM can help. It helps drive continuous review and improvement of plans, triggered by changes in business priorities and operating environment. It also provides a mechanism for the rapid deployment of any changes. So organizations can make small changes to plans as required, without the time and cost of running entirely new RCM projects.
Applying RCM to single failure modes
Another benefit of treating RCM as a process is that you can start to apply it more broadly. For example, RCM projects typically involve a review of multiple assets and hundreds or even thousands of failure modes. However, if you already have an effective structure in place for RCM you can easily and efficiently apply it to single failure modes. A Failure Mode, Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) structure works well in this regard and can be applied to all assets regardless of criticality.
When you apply RCM to single modes of failure or low criticality assets, you may sometimes find that the assets don’t actually require maintenance and that’s okay. The important thing is that you’ve done the analysis and can make that decision based on the assessment of risk.