-
Community Announcements
-
- 107 replies
- 4,888 views
-
- 1 reply
- 26 views
-
The Ultimate Online Maintenance Planning & Scheduling Course 1 2
By Erik Hupje, in Community Announcements
- 22 replies
- 1,766 views
-
-
Most Popular
-
- 107 replies
- 4,888 views
-
What is your single biggest issue when it comes to Maintenance Planning & Scheduling? 1 2 3 4 5
By Erik Hupje, in Planning & Scheduling
- 73 replies
- 3,787 views
-
- 30 replies
- 1,801 views
-
The Ultimate Online Maintenance Planning & Scheduling Course 1 2
By Erik Hupje, in Community Announcements
- 22 replies
- 1,766 views
-
What is your favourite RCA technique and why? 1 2
By Erik Hupje, in Defect Elimination & Root Cause Analysis
- 24 replies
- 1,710 views
-
Forums
-
COMMUNITY CIRCLE
-
- 250
- posts
-
- 67
- posts
-
- 44
- posts
-
- 9
- posts
-
- 34
- posts
-
- No posts here yet
-
-
COMMUNITY DISCUSSION
-
- 114
- posts
-
- 29
- posts
-
- 20
- posts
-
- 22
- posts
-
- 30
- posts
-
-
Recent Posts
-
Raul - I believe that having contracts for parts supply is a good idea, regardless of when executed. For fast moving parts that should be easy to set up as the supplier will have a more or less guaranteed income. For slower moving items it could be challenging - how does the supplier get compensated for effectively storing items on behalf of the company that may or may not use them? For items that may never be used, the problem becomes even more complex. Those latter items are "insurance spares" in every sense of the words. As for tacking the maintenance planning - it also must be done and sooner rather than later if the company is to benefit fully. However, recognize that planning alone isn't enough. Planners and stores-persons are in most cases not equipped to handle risk based determination of spares requirements. They will need some help, perhaps a tool that performs such calculations, to achieve that. I disagree with Wirza's third point about using the technical manual as a starting point for initial sparing. Manufacturer's manuals are often flawed in their maintenance recommendations. Getting into that is a whole different topic. The manufacturer knows what the asset can do, but not what it will be asked to do. The best place to start is with a work forecast based on RCM results, not manufacturer's forecasts. Where asset availability is being constrained by parts unavailability, regardless the cause, and the unavailability is causing substantial loss of revenues, then I would suggest that attempts to reduce stores are only going to make the matter worse. The cost of holding spares, until such time as plant reliability can be improved and spares requirements forecast more accurately, is very likely less (even much less considering that most of it is already a sunk cost), than the cost of lost revenues. -
Hi @Raul Martins, One option that possible to explore is by using (could be excel) to check how long the part have been stored in the inventory, if it has been there for more 1 year then you can categorize as non-moving parts. As example a servomotor was purchased & arrived at the store back in 1 November 2018, but until now there is no sign that this part will be use in the machine. For now, the age is more than 1 year, either you use this part just to ensure the part is moving, or maybe you can other options. The longer parts age in the inventory the risk of damage is also increased considering the humidity & temperature will generate effects. Specifically categorizing the spare parts type can give a big picture of our inventory. Too many parts available but low turn over is also a risk in financial perspective. How do you think? -
-
By Raul Martins · Posted
Hi @Wirza, I like this approach of analysing the challenges separately. Regarding the second item, do you have any specific method to review the non-moving items? Regards, Raul Martins -
By Raul Martins · Posted
Hi @UptimeJim and @Erik Hupje, I am curious about what are you positions regarding having a contingency plan as I mentioned on my last post (reviewing critical spare parts and having a spare parts contract available for emergencies) for short term results and a second plan which would aim at reviewing maintenance processes for the medium term. Do you think this would be a good approach to this situation or focusing your endeavours only on the maintenance process would be more beneficial for the business, although it might take you longer to see the results? Regards, Raul Martins
-
-
RECENT DISCUSSIONS
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics120
-
Total Posts620
-
