Jump to content
Test ×

Raul Martins

Community Leader
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Raul Martins last won the day on January 22

Raul Martins had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

19 Good

5 Followers

About Raul Martins

  • Rank
    Member

Personal Information

Recent Profile Visitors

173 profile views
  1. Hi all, We are currently working on the planning of the content for the next posts. "Potential KPIs" will definitely be added on my list. If any member of the community need any sort of information or have any suggestions or ideas, feel free to send us messages so we can work on creating a more and more helpful community for all of our users. Having said that, this topic continues discussing MTBF. Feel free to keep telling about previous experiences and thoughts about it. Regards, Raul Martins
  2. Hi all, This has been a great discussion so far! I agree to what has been said. Fewer is better. Too many KPIs not only might be too time consuming to measure, but also might lead to confusion. Regarding MTBF itself, although it can be defined as a KPI, I prefer simply calling it as a metric. This is because, as I mentioned before, I would not track the MTBF of an equipment, or system periodically. I like to use MTBF only for specific studies, so before the study and after, maybe once more in the middle of the analysis just to check if I am on the right track. It is like a Life Data Analysis, we probably would not do such analysis every single week or month to track the behave of our assets. @Jim Vantyghem, what if we create a specific topic to discuss about KPIs? I am concerned that, if we talk about too many different KPIs now, this might confuse those who are aiming specifically at MTBF. Regards, Raul Martins
  3. Hi @Jim Vantyghem, Thank's for the reply. Here are my opinions about your post: MTBF is just a metric like any other. Nothing can be stated regarding an equipment, maintenance area or business just by analysing one single KPI, exactly for that reason any maintenance area use several KPI's to control its performance. Such metric will only give you directions in order to show if you are heading towards the right direction or not. This situation is quite common anywhere and I would say that the vast majority of M&R professionals have gone through this situation before. Those who haven't, probably will go through it in the future. However, it is important to say that a M&R professional has to be ready for this sort of issue. A production manager, operator, process engineer may not know how to use it, how it is measured or even what it is. In this situation, the Reliability Engineer has to show them, based on technical books and reliable data that the metric that he has is important to not only to improve the results of the maintenance team, nor the production team, but that metric might play an important role for the sustainability of the company. 1. In a normal situation, I do not see any reason why to review weekly/monthly MTBF. For me, Mean Time Between Failures is a really helpful tool to improve our results, but not to be on a managerial report. I would review more often KPI's such as availability, production results, budget and maintenance cost per unit. I would use MTBF on my bad actors or on improvement opportunities studies. 2. As I said, I would not focus on the MTBF as a KPI. 3. I would not say that the Devil is in the details. However, as John Wooden used to say: "It's the little details that are vital. Little things make big things happen". Regards, Raul Martins
  4. Hi all, I guess the dream of every Reliability Engineer is having a reliable source of data (which includes myself). Unfortunately, lack of reliable maintenance records is a very common issue and dealing with this situation has become part of the daily routine of the vast majority of the Reliability Engineers (although it is wrong). For several times I found myself collecting data by myself instead of using the information available on the CMMS. We discussed a little bit about how we deal with this situation in another topic a few weeks ago. The link can be seen below: https://bit.ly/2R1Kjdp I remember an occasion that I used the MTBF for an equipment that was a bad actor of a fertilizers plant. Basically, that plant was going through big revenue losses and had been working reactively. They had a reactor that was a real bad actor for the results of the plant and something had to be done immediately. Firstly, I collected the data available on the CMMS to determine the MTBF and create a preventive plan of replacing a few componentes every X weeks. Although I knew that was not the best way to create a proper PM program, that worked and a couple of months later, some results could be seen. Having better results and a bit more time, I could later do a better study by using LDA analysis to understand the behaviour of the failure modes and then improve the PM program. Have you guys done something similar using the MTBF to improve your results? Regards, Raul Martins
  5. With the increasingly competitiveness of a globalized market, it is important to put our minds to efficient maintenance control practices, inventory and various other production related items. When it comes maintenance control practices, there are several different metrics that can support us on understanding our weaknesses and making decisions that will lead us to better results in the future. For this week's topic, we are going to discuss a little bit about a widely known metric: the Mean Time Between Failures, also called MTBF. Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) refers to the average amount of time that a device or product works before it fails. This unit of measure includes only the operating time between failures and does not include repair times, assuming the item has been repaired and starts working again. MTBF values are often used to evaluate the probability that a single unit will fail within a certain period of time. How do we calculate it? MTBF = Number of operation hours ÷ Number of failures For instance: MTBF = 1,000 operational hours ÷ 17 failures MTBF = 1,000 ÷ 17 MTBF = 58.8 hours Once you have the MTBF of your equipment, it is possible to determine the reliability of this asset for a period of time, displaying how likely it is for an M&R professional to achieve his goals. Another important KPI that can be calculated using the MTBF, is the availability (it also requires other metrics) of an equipment or system. Now, how about telling us how frequently you use it in your company and how it helps you on reaching your goals and improving results? If you do not use it, tell us why you and what keeps you away from this metric! Regards, Raul Martins
  6. Hi @GThorpe, Welcome on board! It is great to have you with us on this Road to Reliability! Feel free to comment on recent topics and share your thoughts with our members. See you soon. Regards, Raul Martins
  7. Hi @Jim Vantyghem, Definitely! All endeavors should be followed by this step. This is how we build trust and engage people to be part of a culture! In terms of techniques and triggers, would you have something to tell us? For example, different techniques which you use according to how critical the event is. Regards, Raul Martins
  8. Hi @Wirza, Thank's for the reply! That is a solid approach. During these weekly meetings, you analyse only one failure event, or all event occurred on the current/previous week? On my previous job, we did not have a weekly meeting to do RCA. Usually, when an event happened, we would schedule a specific meeting for that event. In terms of frequency, it used to depend on the due dates of the action plan, so we could have one or more on a single week. On top of that, we could have different RCA meetings for different failure events on a single week as well. Regards, Raul Martins
  9. Hi @Jim Vantyghem, Wow, congratulations for the solid answers always based in studies! So you started using NLP modelling in the company you work for? I have superficially studied NLP in the past, and it seems to be an interesting approach when it comes to business management. However, I had never met anyone applying such method in Maintenance Management, which I think this would result in a fantastic outcome! Please, keep sharing with us your experience using this method in your daily routine! His point is exactly culture. When you have a staff member who simply refuse to adjust to a new culture, he says that he may have no other option. When it comes to maintenance management, imagine having an employee who is stuck in a reactive culture, and although you try to show him the benefits of proactive culture, which includes not only the financial results, but also having a safer, as well as happier workplace, he refuses to adjust. In some cases, even a competent leader may struggle to make it happen, especially when you have 100 other team members, unplanned shutdowns, cumbersome processes to deal with and so on and so forth. As I mentioned before, whether it is a usefull, or even a fair strategy, or not, I do not know. If I would use it? Probably not. But the complexity of the topic makes me think about it and seeing different perspectives of this is great! Regards, Raul Martins
  10. Hi all, Having a well established defect elimination process in your company is key to avoid the reoccurrence of past failure events. By doing so, you will not only have a more reliable plant, but also achieve better results. So, for this week's topic, I will create another hypothetical situation in which... "... You work for a company that, although you have been trying to stop the fire fighting, you cannot as it does not have a defect elimination process. What would be your strategy to deal with this issue?" However, it is important to mention that your company already has a Planning and Scheduling area, as well as PM programs. Don't forget of telling us: - how you would create a solid Defect Elimination process; - what techniques you would use - the triggers; and - how you would measure the results of such implementation! Regards, Raul Martins
  11. Hi @Jim Vantyghem, Another great topic! Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us! I truly believe that, if a company does not have a well defined, implement and kept system as you mentioned, achieving poor results will be just a matter of time. If we want to nurture a positive culture, policies should be defined, written and everyone should be trained on that. However, it is important to mention that all staff members, from those who are on the front line to those who are on the board of the company (especially those), should practice such system every single day. Regarding the quote above, I totally agree with Jim Collins, as well as with you. Defining a system for a new company is not easy; however, changing a system is even more complicated. For some reason, this quote reminded me a video that I watched a few years ago in which Jorge Paulo Lemman was interviewed. Lemman, is a Brazilian entrepreneur, who owns big companies, such as the drink and brewing company AB-Inbev (Stella Artois, Budweiser, Corona...) and Heinz (Warren Buffet is his partner), is famous for his risky management strategies. During the video he mentioned that one of the fastest ways of changing the culture of a company, is by renewing part of its staff members, otherwise too much time and energy would be spent. I am not saying that I agree with his point of view, not at all. But it definitely made me think. In somes cases, that might be inevitable, but on the other hand, a leader should try to nurture the new culture on a daily process. What do you think? Regards, Raul Martins
  12. Raul Martins

    Suggestions

    Hi @Ted, I agree with the replies above. Showing people how they might benefit from filling the requests properly is a great way to begin with. Additionally, I would do two more things: 1- Define the minimal information that should be filled in the requests. If such information has not been filled, iMaint should not allow the user to progress with the creation of the request. This "minimal information" should be enough to have solid information to help you and the team to do your tasks, as well as to keep a good history of the events; 2- Initially, step #1 may decrease the requests created on iMaint. In order to tackle that, I would still allow the Store Managers to call instead of creating requests, but only for emergencies; however, they would not call the M&R guys, they should call someone who is in a higher hierarchical level, such as the M&R Manager or even your director. This could inhibit them of not using the system, as the "pressure strategy" would not work with higher levels. For those requests done via call, they should go to the system after solving the issue and create the request straightaway. A KPI could be created so you could track that and have a more precise information when you need to get some help from your manager/director. However, these should only be done after focusing on what @Erik Hupje and @Jim Vantyghem have said. Regards, Raul Martins
  13. Hi @Elison, Welcome on board and congratulations for your new role! Feel free to share your thoughts with us, as well as how challenging it has been and what will be your strategies to tackle such challenges! Regards, Raul Martins
  14. Hi @Gordan, Having solid records and being able to create different reports is something really important for an ERP, as it results in more efficiency when it comes to data analysis. Congratulations! Regards, Raul Martins
  15. Hi @Houssam, Welcome on board! It is great to have you with us on this Road to Reliability! You have a really solid background, congratulations! Would you like to share some of your expertise with our members? We have some great discussions going on in our recent topics, feel free to share your opinion with us or create new topics! Kind regards, Raul Martins
×
×
  • 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..