Howard W Penrose, Ph.D.
VP Electrical Reliability Programs
T-Solutions, Inc.
hpenrose@tsoln-inc.com
The Concept of RCM-Based Motor Management – Part 2
The flavor of RCM Program that is used for an RCM-Based approach to Motor Diagnostics is the Classical RCM concept put forward by the fathers of RCM, Nowlan and Heap. This program has been adopted by the US Navy as the MIL-P-24534A, which has been in place since 1985. This standard outlines a process for the implementation of RCM. The basic steps of the standard are:
1. Set boundaries for the system being reviewed
2. Generate a functional block diagram and partitioning of the system under review
3. Determine functional failure analysis
4. Determine functionally significant items of the system
5. Perform a failure modes and effects analysis
6. Go through a logic tree in order to determine the effectiveness of maintenance tasks for the FMEA
7. Determine servicing and lubrication analysis
8. Set maintenance requirements
9. Draft and evaluate maintenance procedures
10. Define the maintenance tasks
11. Determine tasks for inactive equipment
12. Develop corrective maintenance processes and specifications
13. Develop and prepare procedures and specifications
14. Utilize continuous improvement of the RCM process, such as the Backfit process.
Step 1: Set Boundaries for the System Being Reviewed
Set a system for setting boundaries within the facility being reviewed. This is important, as the RCM process moves forward, to ensure that there is no duplication of effort.
Step 2: Generate a Functional Block Diagram
The purpose of the block diagram is to provide guidance through all of the following steps. It involves noting all of the inputs and outputs of the components and any protective devices in the system.
Step 3: Determine the Functional Failure Analysis
First write out a complete description of the function of the system – as it is intended to be used. For instance: “The pump system is designed so that 480V, 60 Hz, 100 Amps is made available to an electric motor which operates at 1780 RPM. The power is transferred via direct shaft coupling to a pump which provides at least 200 gpm to a height of 100 ft.”
The next step is to identify the internal and external interfaces. Then identify the functional failures of the system.
“A Functional Failure exists when a system or subsystem ceases to provide a required function; Whether the function is active, passive, evident, or hidden.” MIL-P-24534A
Howard W Penrose, Ph.D.
VP Electrical Reliability Programs
T-Solutions, Inc.
hpenrose@tsoln-inc.com
“Maintenance consists of actions taken to ensure that components, equipment, and systems provide their intended functions when required.” – NAVSEA MIL-P
“We do maintenance because we believe that hardware reliability degrades with age, but we can do something to restore or maintain the original reliability that pays for itself.” – NAVSEA MIL-P
“Failure is not an option!” – NASA
“Failures Happen!” – NAVSEA MIL-P
The Concept of RCM-Based Motor Management – Part 1
In order to understand the next few days of RCM-based concepts, we will set a few definitions within today’s lecture.
It is important to understand that good maintenance preserves the function of the equipment. The definition of function that we will use will be: “Any action or operation which an item is intended to perform.” - NAVSEA MIL-P
Within the function, there are a number of classifications:
• Active: Requires activity of an item
• Passive: Requires an item to be inactive
• Evident: Its loss if obvious to the operator
• Hidden: Provided by an item for which there is no immediate indication of malfunction or failure; Demand for such functions usually follows another failure or unexpected event.
• Online: Continuously or continually provided during normal operations. When we discuss CBM equipment, this will refer to instruments used to evaluate condition while equipment is energized.
• Offline: Not continuously or continually provided; Activated by some action or event. When we discuss CBM equipment, this will refer to instruments used to evaluate condition while equipment is de-energized.
Here, we also want to make another point: The intended function of a piece of equipment may be something other than the full design capability, either more or less. It may be that loss of a particular capability of a machine may not impact the intended function of the equipment. In this case, it would not make sense to evaluate or correct the condition of the unused function. As such:
Not All Failures Need To Be Prevented!
This is one of the key principles of effective maintenance. This is also one of the purposes of Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM).
RCM utilizes the principle of risk management to evaluate what, if any, maintenance should be performed on equipment. Risk = Pf x Sf; where Pf is Probability of Failure and Sf is the Severity of Failure. Understanding the risk allows us to put our resources where they provide the greatest benefit.
Howard W Penrose, Ph.D.
VP Electrical Reliability Programs
T-Solutions, Inc.
hpenrose@tsoln-inc.com
“We don’t want most of the business; we want all of it.” – Ernest Gallo
“We want to monopolize the software business.” – Bill Gates, 1970’s
“It is a war, and in wars people really do live and people do die.” – Leslie Wexner, CEO of The Limited, in WAR (Winning at Retail), 1999.
The Mission
The mission of a corporation is to make a profit. The mission of a federal agency, such as the military, is to protect the interests of a country, or to provide services, in the most economical way possible. Virtually all organizations have the mission of the effective use of resources to provide the greatest return on investment. The difference between the two is ‘profit,’ of which the best metric is money.
As you progress through an organization, many lose sight of the actual mission and mix daily tasks, effective or not, as accomplishment. As a result, when a program is cancelled, or other change is made, or even if the program is ignored by managers, frustration results. This is normally due to crossed purposes, and the frustration results from the fact that most professionals want to feel that their personal investment is important to the overall goal. The manager may become frustrated with a program because they do not see how the program affects the overall goal of their personal area of influence.
So, what happens through the organization?
The CEO and/or investors are looking for a return on investment. The owners, or investors, are looking for a way to increase profits in order to increase personal profit. The actual personal ‘need’ may be power, money, recognition, or a combination of the three. How the leader of a company maintains their position is by maximizing profits by making sound investment decisions in the business, normally for the long term. When short term goals are set in order to set maximum profit with little to no investment, the company does not survive. The drive for corporate and personal profit is important to company survival, and is, therefore, the actual mission of the company, regardless of what you find on a plaque. Once this is realized through the whole organization, then decisions begin to make more sense. Unfortunately, the balance is precarious where some forget that people are part of the corporate investment and the balance of need for power and profit become too dominant.
The executive managers of a corporation are normally striving for the top position in the organization and have the same mission in mind. The greater impact that a top level manager has on the overall business will impact their opportunity for the top position. They will have to translate long term vision and goals (Strategy) to tactics.
Mid-level managers are the front-line managers for ensuring that the mission moves forward. How well they perform will impact their opportunities. They implement the corporate tactics.
Supervisors carry out the direction of the corporate goals and requirements. Often they only see the day to day (or month to month) details of the overall corporate strategy.
Technicians, operators, and other hourly professionals are the troops on the front line. How they perform, knowing only the minute to minute details of the strategy and tactics, often presented as ‘mission and vision,’ has a direct impact on the mission of the company. This level is directly task-oriented, even when personal ‘buy-in’ of the strategy and tactics have occurred.
The internal organization also has different purposes:
Executives set the strategy and steer the company.
Marketing develops internal and external PR.
Sales is the front-line for moving product to the end user – bringing in the cash.
Production/Operations makes the product or concept that is sold.
Maintenance/Reliability ensures the availability of the equipment for Production/Operations.
Once, when I was working on my ‘sailor of the quarter,’ while serving on the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71), in the 1980’s, I had a key question asked that helped me understand the overall mission. The purpose of an aircraft carrier is to project power by providing a platform for aircraft, etc. The question was: “What is the most important department on the ship?” What would you think? The operations, engineering, maintenance, propulsion, hull integrity, laundry and other divisions all have the goal of ensuring that aircraft can leave the deck. Are, therefore, the pilots and aircrew the most important people on the carrier? If you watch the news, Discovery Channel or read a military book, you might think so. The actual answer was: All departments are the most important. If any one of the departments failed in its set of tasks, then the whole vessel becomes ineffective.
Now, on the aircraft carrier, if the sailors are wasteful, slack in their tasks, etc. it becomes more expensive to operate the vessel. Yet, an investment must be made in training, watchstanding and other areas that cost money. The precarious balance has to do with coming up with the most effective way to ensure the readiness of the ship. The Captain is directly responsible for the effectiveness of the ship and the associated costs. He answers to an Admiral who is responsible for the effectiveness of a fleet (or group, etc) and is responsible for the associated costs. He answers, ultimately, to the President and the Congress/Senate, who all answer to the People. The People are taxed and a portion of the funds are provided for military. This money makes its way all the way back to the sailor who is performing his duty.
In a company, the profits generated from the purchase of the product produced by the company makes its way throughout the company. The result is that the mission of the corporation is the same, make a profit. When any part of the system is ineffective, it impacts the profitablity of the whole organization.
Returning to the point that we are trying to make:
Performing maintenance for the sake of performing maintenance on rotating machinery is not effective. Instead, we must think in terms of what is the most effective method for maintaining the availability of the equipment. We know, for a fact, that a lack of performance in maintenance has a direct, negative impact on ‘the bottom line.’ We sometimes do not realize that overperforming maintenance results in the same problem.
Howard W Penrose, Ph.D.
VP Electrical Reliability Programs
T-Solutions, Inc.
hpenrose@tsoln-inc.com
“The Lord gave us two ends – one to sit on and the other to think with. Success depends on which one we use the most.” – Ann Landers
“I don’t know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.” – Bill Cosby
“A successful man is one who can lay a firm foundation with the bricks others have thrown at him.” – David Brinkley
Concept for the Philosophy of Motor Management 1
In general, the internal resistance to the application of motor management programs can be considered through the Theory of Contraints:
1. Any improvement is a change; and,
2. Any change is a perceived threat to security; and,
3. Any threat to security gives rise to emotional resistance; and,
4. Emotional resistance can only be overcome by a stronger emotion (program champion).
Other considerations for the development of a successful motor management program include:
• Selecting equipment to include in the program;
• Selecting CBM and maintenance practices for the equipment;
• Determining vendor-partners
• Setting goals for program and personnel
• Set metrics for determining success.
Based upon my personal past experience in the development of motor management programs, we will explore an RCM-Based approach to Motor Management. In such a program, the rules of Classical RCM and Backfit RCM shall be applied as means to both set the scope of equipment to be tested and to continually evaluate the success of the program. In addition, to ensure the effective application of the program, we must continuously ask ourselves: What impact will this action or process have on the mission of the company.
Therefore we are going to explore the following points in the development of the program:
1. What is the ‘mission’ of the company. I do not mean the written ‘mission,’ but the actual one – ie: To make a profit. Then you must view the mission of each level within the company.
2. Perform an RCM-based analysis of the facility and systems in order to determine the systems that will be included in the program.
3. Selection of CBM tools and maintenance practices to meet the analysis.
4. Selection of vendor-partners including discussion of spare parts storage
5. Select personnel to operate program
6. Select goals for personnel and program
7. Select metrics for determining success of personnel and program
8. Periodically review and modify program as required.
Over the next period of time, we will review each of the points of development.
[Note: The Electrical Reliability Group of T-Solutions, Inc. provides motor system maintenance and management program development consulting. Please contact me directly: howard@motordiagnostics.com for information. T-Solutions, Inc website: http://www.tsoln-inc.com]
Howard W Penrose, Ph.D.
VP Electrical Reliability Programs
T-Solutions, Inc.
hpenrose@tsoln-inc.com
“The fishermen know that the sea is dangerous and the storm terrible, but they have never found these dangers sufficient reason for remaining ahore.” – Vincent van Gogh
“An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made, in a very narrow field.” – Niels Bohr, Nobel Prize Winning Physicist
Defining Motor System Management
In 1993, I had originally defined electric motor system maintenance and management as Total Motor System Maintenance and Management. Following that period, other motor management definitions were put forward focusing on: Energy efficiency; Repair vs replace decisions; Maintenance and Predictive Maintenance; and/or, Motor storage. However, few, if any, focused on motor life and reliability and many programs had cross purposes.
The objective of any true motor management program is to extend the effective useful life of the motor system combined with continuous improvement of the system. This includes:
• Energy improvements
• Motor system maintenance
• Motor system reliability
• Repair vs replace decisions
• Covers the incoming power to the driven load
Definition: Motor system maintenance and management is the philosophy of continuous improvement of all aspects of the motor system from incoming power to the driven load. It involves all components of energy, maintenance and reliability from system cradle to grave.
Howard W Penrose, Ph.D.
VP Electrical Reliability Programs
T-Solutions, Inc.
hpenrose@tsoln-inc.com
“Nuclear war would really set back cable TV.” – Ted Turner, Turner Broadcasting
“My advice is to focus 100% on doing your job better than anybody else. I’ve seen a lot of highflying people fall flat because they were so focused on the next job, they didn’t get the current job done.” – Carly Fiorina, CEO of Hewlett-Packard in 2001
“Sleep is a colossal waste of time.” – Thomas Edison
Energy Impact of Motor Management – Defined
“Modern management practices often do not take into account the importance of motor systems maintenance and management requirements. Through efforts in cost control, many industrial and commercial firms will reduce maintenance staffs, take least cost approaches to corrective actions, and sacrifice preventive maintenance programs. The result has been increased energy costs and downtime resulting from equipment not operating to full potential and failing unexpectedly. This problem results in billions of dollars of additional energy consumption and lost revenue.” – Howard W Penrose, Ph.D., ‘A Novel Approach to Electric Motor System Maintenance and Management for Improved Industrial and Commercial Uptime and Energy Costs,’ SUCCESS by DESIGN Publising, 1997.
The United States generated over 3,848 Billion kWh of electricity in 2003 of which approximately 2,270 Billion kWh (59%) were consumed by electric motor systems. Over 70% of the electric energy bill of an average manufacturing facility, and over 90% of an average process facility, is consumed by electric motor systems. The application of just a basic maintenance program would have an energy impact, alone, of 45.4 Billion kWh (approximately $6.8 Billion USD) nationally. Reliability programs have the potential impact of 317.8 Billion kWh of energy, or $47.7 Billion USD.
In 1998, I published a report showing that, in the USA alone, there are approximately 1.2 million motor failures per year totaling approximately 45 million horsepower. Of this there are 25 million horsepower manufactured (including for new applications) and 38.5 million horsepower repaired. From national approach, a potential of 300 average Mega-Watts per year could be saved if motors under 500 horsepower could be rewound with little or no impact on efficiency. In Illinois, where I published the report as a Senior Research Engineer with the University of Illinois’ Energy Resources Center, the impact was determined to be 66.3 million kWh per year, with an environmental impact of reducing CO2 emissions by 46,640 tons per year, NO2 by 160 tons per year and SO2 by 466 tons per year.
(Note: All of the above information was derived from US Department of Energy Office of Industrial Technologies reports and other US Government DOE and environmental reports and resources.)
Over 2004, I had focused on energy as a reliability metric. The reason is simple: While the energy impact in a facility through the improvement of motor system reliability is minimal (approximately 5%, or less), it is a value that can be immediately measured and quantified. Therefore, through this part of this Blog series, I will use formulae to estimate the savings in energy to show payback followed by payback calculated with a multiplier of 20 times the energy savings.
For instance:
A 50 horsepower, 94% efficient motor in a belted application, operating 6,000 hours per year at 70% load, $14/kW demand and $0.16/kWh energy cost with a man-hour cost of $200 average to align and tension the belts (assuming that the belts are slightly loose or worn):
Demand reduction: 0.56 kW
Energy usage reduction: 3,360 kWh
Energy Cost improvement: $630
Reliability multiplier: $12,600
Simple payback: 4 months energy/5 days reliability
Details on how these calculations are derived will come from two free e-books downloadable from http://www.motordoc.net:
Book 3: “A Novel Approach to Motor System Maintenance and Management for Improved Commercial and Industrial Uptime and Energy Costs,” Howard W Penrose, Ph.D., SUCCESS by DESIGN Publishing, 1997.
Book 4: “A Novel Approach to Industrial Assessments for Energy, Production, Reliability and Waste Stream,” Howard W Penrose, Ph.D., SUCCESS by DESIGN Publishing, 2000.
Howard W Penrose, Ph.D.
VP Electrical Reliability Programs
T-Solutions, Inc.
hpenrose@tsoln-inc.com
“Some men succeed by what they know; some by what they do; and a few by what they are.” – Elbert Hubbard
“It is no use saying ‘we are doing our best.’ You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary.” – Sir Winston Churchill
“Actually, I’m an overnight success. But it took twenty years.” – Monty Hall
Introduction:
I have taken a slight detour from the past lectures to address what appears to be a very serious issue in the success of programs. While, in 2004, I witnessed some tremendous improvements in the application of Motor Diagnostics and, so called, Motor Management Programs, I also had been contacted, or witnessed, a number of program disasters. By disasters, I mean that I have been contacted concerning infant mortality of a number of programs – not just in small companies, but also larger concerns including utilities.
The question is: Why are some programs failing while a great many, in the same industries, are succeeding with extreme results? The answer(s) is/are not as simple as it may seem.
For instance, one of the reasons that I re-entered the consulting world from the equipment manufacturing world was the perceived need for help in the successful development of programs. Companies, world-wide, have started investing in the equipment for their motor diagnostics or motor management programs, setting some form of new/repair specifications, looking to financial payback, and other positive actions.
Unfortunately, many of the attempts are half-hearted, killed in their infancy, by a key missing component: Understanding the philosophy – science, if you will – of the program. A successful program requires focus, logical steps, effective management and sacrifice. It is common, on the other hand, for many to think that the purchase of equipment, alone, and the implementation of the instrumentation, is the program.
The program, in which instruments are just the tools, is often overlooked or misunderstood.
In this, fifth of the Penrose Lecture Series™, we will explore the philosophy, process and how the program can be successfully implemented.