Jump to content
Test ×

Erik Hupje

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Erik Hupje

  1. Welcome @Lorna great to have you with us. SAP is a beast that is for sure, hard to tame but very powerful. And welcome to you too @LaWayne Smith There are a few approaches I recommend to breaking that typical reactive cycle and which way you go depends on the state of your plant, but prioritisation of new work requests is key as well as trying to eliminate defects and those repetitive failures. Prioritisation can be a quick win and really give you more breathing space. But getting rid of a defect that has been causing a lot of breakdowns or downtime (i.e. a bad actor) can be a really good way to show to management the value of investing in reliability improvement...
  2. Welcome @GThorpe, great to have you onboard. We'll soon be big enough to have a face-to-face community meet up here in Brisbane!
  3. Welcome @Wirza, @craig and @Andronica Kwapeng. In the case of Wirza and Craig apologies for the sluggish reply, but glad to have you all joined. looking forward to your contributions!
  4. Fantastic topic and post @Jim Vantyghem... I'm going to listen first
  5. For those of you who are interested in joining the online course in Maintenance Planning & Scheduling and who did not pre-register their interest, I am happy to inform you that the Pilot Program for the course is now open! Join the Pilot Program The Pilot Program will offer up to 30 students early access to the course and these select few will get: lifetime access to the course (so access to all future course updates!) increased access to me as during the Pilot Program we will conduct more frequent live 'office hours' to answer questions all course materials like videos, slides, audio and transcripts a 25% discount off the list price and of course, a Certificate of Completion I do ask that students in the Pilot Program provide ongoing feedback during the course. That will help me to iron out any last bugs in the Online Learning Management System and make any tweaks to the course content. I am a big believer in continuous improvement and getting your feedback will increase the quality of the course - for you and for all future students. You have until the 31st January to join, but I would strongly recommend you don’t wait that long as 300+ people have indicated they want to join the Pilot Program. And I only have space for 30 students. Spaces might fill up fast and once we hit the 30 participants the Pilot Program will close. Once the Pilot Program closes, the next opportunity to join the course will be in 2-3 months and without any discount. Join the Pilot Program
  6. Erik Hupje


    Hi @Ted, thanks for sharing that real life issue. Couple of thoughts - first of all, go visit a couple of stores and see what the real issue is. Why are people not using the CMMS work request feature? What are the barriers? And do the people understand the importance / value it adds for you and your team? Typically I have found that in instances like these it would be good to agree a focal point for each site/store who enters the work requests (or maybe a couple). You then have someone you can train, coach and it should also help communication. As @Jim Vantyghem mentioned these issues are often a lot about how you deal with people and a good viewpoint is to consider "WIIFM" or "What's In It For Me?" What doe the stores personnel get out of using the CMMS work request feature. If you can show them how it makes their life easier, less frustrating etc. then you should be on to a winner. Please let us knowhow you go in a future update. Kind regards, Erik
  7. Sounds to me that what you're describing there @Raul Martins is a spares strategy (?) where you conduct a risk based analysis of whether you need to stock something or not. I am not sure a contract will help too much, as @UptimeJim mentioned, vendors will be quite happy to stock spares for you that are fast moving and therefore you could quite easily purchase yourself without a contract. Getting someone to hold long lead items on your behalf is costly and typically not worth the hassle / cost unless you use an aggregator / stockist and take more of a commodity approach i.e. not insist on like for like but are willing to accept functionally the same - that can work well for e.g. valves. For critical spares you probably won't have much choice than to hold them in stock yourself. If you're in industry where production losses are high value then the prudent option would probably be to start off with a relatively high inventory and progressively reduce inventory over time - just be careful that you don't get rid of non-moving inventory that are in fact critical to your operation!
  8. I totally agree @UptimeJim I normally recommend people to first fix the basic maintenance processes like planning & scheduling, a robust PM program and attaching parts to your PMs etc. Only then should you start tackling spare parts management. In a way, we first need to get our own house (i.e. maintenance) in order before we start telling otehrs how to do their part. In the interim a simple weekly meeting between procurement and the maintenance planner can solve a lot of problems.
  9. Thanks for the post @UptimeJim I fully agree that one of the main merits of the CMRP certification is that it is meant to be experience based and not something you 'just' do a course for. Unfortunately because the certification is in such demand there are a lot of organisations offering those 3-5 day courses with the exam being held on the last day. And yes, I have seen and met a number of people who passed these exam based on courses like these which I think do not really have the depth of experience and expertise you would expect - or maybe I should say I would expect - from a CMRP. That said, I do believe the CMRP certification is a good thing for our profession as a whole. And when I am asked I typically do recommend doing it especially for those early in their career. But, I have seen enough to know that having a CMRP certification is not enough for me to trust someone's technical credentials.
  10. Just wanted to share a podcast interview I did the other week with Ryan Chan, CEO of Upkeep. It was a great chat, mostly about maintenance planning & scheduling: Masterminds in Maintenance Episode 13: What to Avoid in Maintenance Planning and Scheduling with Erik Hupjé https://www.onupkeep.com/blog/mim_13/
  11. Hi @Engrjoe you can use this link to download a FMEA template Its a template that I had intended to complete and provide in additional to my article on FMEAs: Why the Heck is My Equipment Not Reliable? Unfortunately I just never got round to including it in the article but will get it done soon (once I have made some more modifications to the template).
  12. Hi @Ted, I'm not familiar with meat processing plants so this could be a silly questions, but is there an opportunity o move to a different type of floor where you don't have that failure mode of breaking tiles and grout?
  13. Hi @Bijoy Xavier before you decide what tools to buy or what preventive maintenance you need, you really need to determine what equipment you have, what failure modes you should expect and how best to mitigate these. That in simple terms determines your PM program and from there you can then determine tools, spares etc. Do you already have a complete asset register and equipment hierarchy for the new factory? If not that should be step 1.
  14. Hi @Ted, welcome to the community! Great to have you with us, you bring a very diverse background with you. What are some of the main issues that you struggle with in your role at Farm Boy Canada?
  15. First of all let me thank you for being a valued member of the Road to Reliability™ Community! I really do appreciate it. We started this community with the idea of creating a safe, online space where maintenance & reliability professionals like ourselves can share our experience and ask for advice. Since launching the community, it has steadily grown to well over 800 members worldwide, which is fantastic. But, I will be the first to admit that I have not been able to provide as much time to this community as I would have hoped. At the moment I am busy finishing my first online course on Maintenance Planning & Scheduling which will launch in January. I'm 100% committed to making this a thriving and valued online space, but communities require a lot of work. A lot of work. So I have decided to hire a Community Leader who will help moderate the community, stimulate discussions and encourage sharing. Someone who will help bring the best out in all of us. And I am please to announce that Raul Martins will soon start as a part-time Community Leader with Road to Reliability™. Raul lives in Brisbane, like me, but is originally from Brazil. Raul is a Mechanical Engineer by background and has an MBA in Maintenance Engineering Management aligned with Asset Management and a certificate in Reliability Engineering Consulting by Reliasoft. We're lucky to be able to bring Raul onboard and I am looking forward to reinvigorating our community in the months ahead. Please join me in welcoming Raul to our community and lets make this the most inclusive and inspiring online community for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals around the world! Kind Regards, Erik PS I have always said that this community would be free and remain committed to that principle. So despite hiring a Community Leader, I will keep my promise and ensure this community remains free for everyone.
  16. Welcome @Michael, great to have you on board.
  17. As you know, I will giveaway a 100% scholarship for the Maintenance Planning & Scheduling Online Course to one lucky student who has expressed his or her interest. To make it a bit more fun, you can increase your chances of winning that scholarship, by responding to this post with a really good reason why you should be the person receiving that scholarship. Let's hear it ... The fun part is that all members of the community can vote on the best answer! And I will use these answers to help pick a lucky winner. PS I do reserve the right to pick a winner whose answer may not be included in this forum or may not have received the most votes.
  18. Hi @UptimeJim great to have you on board and part of this community. Looking forward to reading your thoughts and advice.
  19. Erik Hupje


    Hi @Gladiator, some quick answers: 1. if you experience 1 failure in 168 operating hours then the MTBF is 168 (168/1) and your equipment uptime is 98.8% (168-2/168). MTBF is not very useful to calculate on a weekly basis in my view, better opting for uptime if you want a weekly metric. 2. indeed OEE = Availability x Performance x Quality which useful in a manufacturing environment where your production line can suffer from availability losses, performance (capacity) losses and quality losses. If your production line does not have a rejection rate i.e. you never produce underspec product then your quality would indeed be 100%. If your production line can not slow down and experience a loss in capacity, i.e. it either runs at 100% of capacity or it does not run then the performance factor is not relevant. So if both quality and performance are not relevant to your operation then you're basically just using Availability. 3. I can't really make any sensible recommendations on how to improve reliability in your plant, without knowing a lot more. What I would suggest you do is to log all your downtime carefully, determine whether it is scheduled downtime due to PM's or unscheduled (reliability issues). For all unscheduled downtime assign a category and cause. Analyse the data and see where your downtime is coming from, then start tackling that issue. PS if you let me know what name you'd like to use I can update it for you in the back-ned of the community software
  20. That's quite a list @Jim Vantyghem and I recognise most if not all of them... in fact, I think it's a classic list of a highly reactive maintenance organisation that has been stretched too thin. I was just working on recording one of the course modules from my Planning & Scheduling course where I talk about the non-monetary benefits that an efficient planning & scheduling process brings. And I think one of the most important ones is that in a more efficient working environment frustration is reduced, because people waste less of their time, and feel more productive, there are less emergencies. That eventually leads to more ownership and people being able to take pride in their work once again.
  21. Erik Hupje


    Hi @Gladiator, theoretically you could of course only include failures that related to maintenance in an MTBF calculation, but I would not recommend it for a few reasons: most failures have multiple causes and you will likely find that you have failures where maintenance contributed to the failure but might not have been the immediate 'trigger'. I feel you could waste a lot of time debating which failure to include or not using a jointly owned metric like MTBF, or uptime, can be very useful to build collaboration between departments because they are now all working to a joint goal i.e. to increase MTBF or uptime separating your KPI like this may lead to maintenance not getting involved in equipment that has a low MTBF just not due to maintenance issues. Imagine you have a category of equipment that has a lot of design issues and therefore experiences a low MTBF. That low MTBF would be owned by engineering given that it's due to design, but who has to make the frequent repairs? Maintenance and so it should be of great interest to you to reduce those defects and stop the recurrent repairs, but the way the MTBF metric is being used it may just lead to "well thats an engineering problem" ... Please do let us know which way you go with this. PS. Would you mind changing your name to your real name at least your first name? I really prefer to keep this forum as supportive and friendly as possible and addressing each other by our names is always helpful in that. Thank you for your understanding.
  22. Welcome @Cornelius Mpesi, great to have you part of this community and looking forward to hearing more from you.
  23. Welcome back @Jim Vantyghem and congratulations with the new role! Looking forward to reading more about your journey, the challenges and how you intend to solve them.
  24. Welcome to the community @Erick Lubat great to have you with us.
  25. Great topic @Derek Brown and I think one that many older plants do struggle with. In my view there is no reason why your CMMS would stop you from moving to condition based maintenance. For example vibration monitoring can be simply set up as a 1-monthly or 3-monthly time based task where someone goes out and does the vibration round. That data is then analysed and used to determine whether condition is deteriorating and make an assessment on when a scheduled restoration task might be required. Many organisations fall down in this area in that they diligently do the CBM rounds, collect and analyse the CBM data, but then do not take action quick enough to address an impending failure. If this happens you still end up with an unplanned failure that needs urgent attention and you have spent money on CBM, but did not get the benefit (i.e. reducing downtime and potentially collateral damage due to the failure). It might be that your CMMS team was thinking of a solution where the CMMS actually triggers the work order based on condition data - that is a step further down the implementation curve and one that can be wrought with other issues like false positives. As with many of these things start with small steps. Regarding the 20:80 ratio of PM:CBM tasks I would be careful in taking that as a hard rule of thumb, instead I would see it more as an aspiration especially in a complex, hazardous plant like a refinery where you will have a lot of time based compliance related maintenance. Also a ratio like that is never really our objective, it is merely a tool to get us to a highly reliable plant that is safe and with minimal cost. Before you make a big move on CBM I would actually first analyse your corrective workload to determine whether your PM program is effective in mitigating failures. If it is then your journey to CBM is really about efficiency and cost effectiveness. In that case I would start looking at the PMs that are the most costly across say a 5 or 10 year period when accounting for materials, services and internal labour. Take the worst offenders and analyse the failure mode that PM is mitigating and see if it can be done more efficiently by extending intervals or adopting a CBM approach. However, if your PM program is not effective in preventing significant failures I would first put your effort there (and that may or may not include CBM). Hope that helps.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and use of We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..