Providing a saner approach to maintenance
Conflict with operations can be solved with better data, communications, and integration.
If production and maintenance are at loggerheads in your manufacturing plant, the way out of that jam could be better communication tools. Some of those tools are in the form of new technology that better aligns the unique goals of each part of the process; others are human tools that require talking through the issues involved.
Both were on display at the ARC Advisory Groups’ session in Orlando, “Synchronizing Operations and Maintenance,” which featured presentations from energy and transportation companies on how their operations evolved to overcome communication bottlenecks.
Such issues are often a result of a lack of data sharing across platforms, said Ralph Rio of ARC Advisory Group, who moderated the session. ARC’s Asset Lifecycle Management model puts a high emphasis on improving assets during their lifecycle.
“We feel there is opportunity for further optimization if there is synchronization across groups so when maintenance schedules downtime, it appears in the production schedule,” Rio said.
Integrating maintenance at 5 plants
“We live in a world that’s very regimented, with lots of rules we have to follow,” noted Robert Scampton of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group. His department was responsible to bring five nuclear plants in three states—each with different maintenance systems—under a common maintenance and production platform.
“We had trouble getting everyone in line,” Scampton said. “They didn’t talk very well with each other. They needed to be aligned as a fleet.”
The first part of that alignment was to determine what each facility needed to have—issues such as alarm events, tracking of equipment performance, when it was safe to perform maintenance work, and equipment licensing requirements. After settling on a single software vendor, Constellation went about the process of pulling the team and the data together under the new platform.
“It was Change Management 101,” Scampton said. “The keys are to create a cross-disciplined team include representatives from all departments affected by the change. You have to demonstrate the importance of the changes, communicate about the change frequently and celebrate the change frequently.”
Consistent data, tagout
Besides simplifying the company’s need for rigorous regulatory compliance, the move to the common platform allowed for a single tagout procedure built into the software. The tag sharing program put in place saved staff time and focused effort without compromising personnel safety or plant safety.
Eric Winterberg with APM Terminals North America, a global port container operations company with terminals throughout the world, had a more fundamental problem. “We’re very operationally based so operations come first, maintenance second,” said Winterberg.
“There was a lack of consistency in data, but not one installation was the same. We had the challenge of standardizing that installation. Overall, the maintenance process was disconnected from operations. We were trying to catch up the whole time to keep facilities operating,” Winterberg added.
Beginning three years ago with a CMMS system in Belgium, APM Terminals will have rolled out its software to 95% of its worldwide terminals. “We’ve been able to standardized maintenance operations anywhere in the world,” Winterberg said.
Change to preventive
“It allowed maintenance results to be analyzed against operations data. We were able to find a window of time for preventive maintenance. Maintenance moved from reactive to preventive, and it improved resource scheduling.
Winterberg said the biggest change is not in software or in personnel; it a confidence that both are producing better decisions. “It’s a mindset change for an organization,” he said. “It doesn’t happen overnight. It took us a year and half just to design the solution. Our change in mindset is evolving. But it’s a saner platform for us to move forward.”
ARC World Forum is Feb. 11-14, in Orlando, Fla. www.arcweb.com
Case Study Database
Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.
These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.
Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.
Annual Salary Survey
In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.
Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.