00 Asset Management - General

One of the main developments in ISO 55000 is the expansion of the meaning of "asset" to include assets that are not plant and equipment assets (e.g., human, knowledge, or reputation assets). This aspect seems to be understated somewhat in explaining what's new in ISO 55000. To better understand the expanded asset concept in ISO 55000, this presentation will explain the "three axes model of assets"; demonstrate its application by contrasting two cases (plant and equipment in a nuclear plant vs. human assets in a nuclear plant); and explore knowledge assets in a professional trade organization (e.g., PEMAC). We'll suggest how professional trade organizations (like PEMAC) might manage their knowledge assets, which actually include both content (knowledge) and trainers (human). The results are twofold: an enhanced awareness of non-traditional assets in ISO 55000 and a basic proposed plan for a knowledge-based professional organization to manage its assets in keeping with ISO 55000.

Reliability Centered Maintenance – Reengineered, provides an optimized approach to a well established and highly successful method used for determining failure management policies for physical assets. It makes the original method that was developed to enhance flight safety, far more useful in a broad range of industries where asset criticality ranges from high to low. RCM-R® is focused on the science of failures and what must be done to enable long term sustainably reliable operations. If used correctly, RCM-R® is the first step in delivering fewer breakdowns, more productive capacity, lower costs, safer operations and improved environmental performance. Maintenance has a huge impact on most businesses whether its presence is felt or not. RCM-R® ensures that the right work is done to guarantee there are as few nasty surprises as possible that can harm the business in any way. RCM-R® addresses the shortfalls of RCM that have inhibited its broad acceptance in industry. Little new work has been done in the field of RCM since the 1990’s, yet demand for such a method, better adapted to industrial applications is higher than ever and growing. Demographics and ever more complex systems are driving a need to be more efficient in our use of skilled maintenance resources while ensuring first time success – greater effectiveness is needed. RCM-R® was developed to leverage on RCM’s original success at delivering that effectiveness while addressing the concerns of the industrial market. RCM-R® addresses the RCM method and shortfalls in its application. It modifies the method to consider asset and even failure mode criticality so that rigor is applied only where it is truly needed. It removes (within reason) the sources of concern about RCM being overly rigorous and too labor intensive without compromising on its ability to deliver a tailored failure management program for physical assets sensitive to their operational context and application. RCM-R® also provides its practitioners with standard based guidance for determining meaningful failure modes and causes facilitating their analysis for optimum outcome. It places RCM into the Asset Management spectrum strengthening the original method by introducing International Standard based risk management methods for assessing failure risks formally. RCM-R® employs quantitative reliability methods tailoring evidence based decision making whenever historical failure data is available.

A criticality analysis is a systematic approach to evaluating potential risks, therefore consequences that can impact the business.  The criticality analysis has defined criteria that outlines the potential consequences so that they can be evaluated, categorised and prioritised.  Using the defined criteria for each major area of risk ensure all equipment is vaulted with emotion removed as much as possible.

Since asset management is an organizational system, it is imperative that the organization takes into account the different factors that affect them.  This includes the external context such as social, cultural, economic and physical environments.  Regulatory, financial are other external contexts which needs to be considered.  The internal context includes the organizational culture, environment, and the objectives.

“Sustainability through reliability” — presented at the 2015 MainTrain Conference — focused on the rapid growth of passenger flow at Toronto Pearson Airport and how, due to this growth, we were experiencing a high number of plumbing drainage failures. We carried out an RCA on our system and came up with changes in how we would prevent drainage failures. The changes we made dealt with our plumbing design standards; food and beverage tenant fats; oil and organics recovery system; lease agreements; and maintenance practices. However, that was only the starting point. In this presentation, we’ll discuss RCA conducted, the failures experienced, and the enhancements and improvements we made to make our system more reliable.

In this workshop, you’ll learn to foster an asset management culture within your organization with a focus on methods to form alignment, engagement, and internal championing. Based on the speaker’s experience and lessons learned in establishing and updating a program for large government organizations with diverse and complex portfolios, he’ll present his approach for the City of Mississauga. He’ll provide an overview on how to keep the program organized with large amounts of data and information, while staying committed to a fundamental view of purpose.

In 2017, the LINK Automated People Mover (APM) at Toronto Pearson International Airport transported an average of 24,000 passengers per day — a 20% increase in passenger traffic from 2015, according to a 2017 report by the GTAA. To increase operational service levels, preventative maintenance optimization (PMO) initiatives were undertaken in 2015 and 2016 in co-ordination with the APM owner, manufacturer, and O&M service provider. The initiatives were designed to increase the overall day-to-day operational run-time of the LINK system while maintaining existing levels of safety and reliability. In this workshop, we’ll use the LINK APM system as a case study to discuss the requirements for successful PMO implementation, which include interorganizational communication and co-operation, RCM strategies, and due diligence as it relates to safety-related subsystems and processes. We’ll also offer a blueprint for similar optimization strategies.

With all the talk about big data and the IIoT, many are asking how can we use this in maintenance? The IIoT enables us to put sensors in any location where we might want to collect and analyze equipment condition and performance data. There are companies that offer predictive maintenance services, and some companies do this for themselves, in-house. Typically, it’s the larger companies that can afford this, but democratization has meant this has become available to a much broader market. But there are hurdles to taking advantage of this sort of continuous monitoring program, even for your most critical equipment. One, it’s expensive, whether you do it in-house or outsource. And two, there are data bottlenecks. Condition monitoring data comes is huge volumes and it’s all time-sensitive. Even if you can afford it, you need a data handling network with a lot of capacity. In this workshop, we’ll present a viable technical solution to the data bottleneck problem — based on a solution already proven in financial securities markets — that opens up these possibilities in the realm of plant continuous condition monitoring.

Asset Management Roadmaps aren’t always perfect. Often they are a work in progress. In this webcast participants will see the journey that EPCOR Water Services Inc. (EWSI) undertook when developing its Asset Management Roadmap/Framework, and learn that even with challenges along the way, the organization overall ended up with a greater understanding and acceptance of asset management.EWSI’s initial framework, developed in 2011, was closely aligned with BSI PAS 55 and later revised to reflect ISO 55000 standards. Participants will learn more about the organization’s first attempt at a typical management system development process that took place over the next 24 month period, and see how this initial approach was unsuccessful.With lessons learned, the organization revised its approach in 2013, looking at asset management related gaps with EWSI operations and used process improvement methodology to develop procedures and tools to resolve those gaps. One of the major gaps identified was lack of asset management plans. The next year, a pilot project focusing on the 10-Steps of asset management (SIMPLE) was completed.Participants will see how this pilot project demonstrated the start-to-finish development of an asset management plan, and the development and field testing of several standards, procedures and tools that would become part of EWSI’s asset management framework. This approach demonstrated the value of asset management, resulting in greater understanding and acceptance of asset management throughout EWSI.

Jeffboat is a company with a long history.  Originally named the Howard Steamboat Company, Jeffboat is America’s largest inland ship builder and has been manufacturing ships for over 100 years.  Jeffboat has built such famous ships as the Mississippi Queen, the General Jackson showboat and the Casino Aztar riverboat casino. Like most manufacturing firms, Jeffboat has an enormous amount of equipment stretched out over a shipyard that is over a mile in length that is needed to make its boats.  Also like many old-line manufacturing firms, Jeffboat has both equipment and employees who have been there for several decades. Overall, because of the size of the shipyard and age of the equipment, Jeffboat’s maintenance was used to working in reactive mode.  There was no CMMS software in place and equipment was put into numerous Excel spreadsheets.  In addition, it was often hit or miss whether the right parts were in the stores room and finding the right equipment often took maintenance technicians a significant amount of time.  There was no Scheduler/Planner and maintenance procedures were done informally and based on need at that particular moment.When implementing a maintenance management strategy, a critical component is the resistance to change. Whether it is the introduction of new software or a complete overhaul of the maintenance function, the process of change represents disruptive technology (Christenson, …). According to Christenson, most changes are really improvements on something old and the old paradigms can be used. However, there are changes that organizations need to make that disrupt the dominant paradigm, rather than sustaining it. These are disruptive technologies and make the old things less important or obsolete. The problem with these disruptive changes is that people are still applying the old paradigms to the new realities. They are trying, in a sense, to understand the car as nothing more than a carriage without horses.