Employ standard work in maintenance tasks
In many organizations, the focus on maintenance tasks is too general in nature, trusting the craftsperson to do the right thing. While we should trust our people, most of whom are highly competent and skilled, we also should set the expectation for the work to be accomplished in a precise manner. Otherwise, how do we improve if there is no one method of “standard work”?
Recognize that if we leave it up to individuals, we will have as many methods as we have individuals who do the work. As a team using the continuous feedback process, we want to determine the most effective and precise method to perform any given task.
Why, might you ask? Using precision maintenance, you reduce or avoid early life failure due to resonance, unbalance, soft foot, contamination (i.e. moisture, chemical, particle), poor lubrication, excessive heat or friction, looseness, imbalance or misalignment. Remember that roughly 89 percent of failures occur in early life or during the constant failure period.
Rather than “Check belt” as a task, use “Check belt for tightness (using a belt tension device), fraying, cracking, damage”. More specifically, what should the tension be? With other components, what should the torque be on the fasteners? What should the gap, clearances or tolerances be? What is the maximum vibration allowable on the installation of new equipment? Where is the precision alignment? Do you use sheave gauges to determine wear? How much wear is acceptable prior to replacement?
Do you perform “standard work” in your maintenance tasks?
Related posts:
- If you want to be successful with standard work, read on Many companies say that they use standard work, but actually,...
- Standard work: The basis for continuous improvement If you were to ask an operator or even...
- Skimping on the training puts your CMMS project at risk Training for users of a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS)...
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment and subscribing to the email alerts or RSS feed.
Filed Under: Featured, Featured Category, Maintenance Excellence | Tags: change management, maintenance management, People Management, standard work
Comments
By Robert Schindler on August 15th, 2010 at 4:19 am
Very good point, Jeff. I can back up your comments with my own experience where a few simple measuring points or standards added made a huge difference in the over-all value of a PM.
By Gregg A. Pacelli on August 25th, 2010 at 4:49 am
Jeff,
In an ideal world specific PM tasks would have all the specs and details included. However in my experience most do not.
We are relying more and more on standard practices especially when typically “routine” or PM work is contracted out.
Two ways to improve;
1. Write better PMs
2. Improve training of tradespeople on best practices
By Jeff Shiver on September 8th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
The PM Procedures themselves can be a training tool. Not to mention, the procedures are a great way to capture some of the knowledge from the large numbers of people close to retiring in the short term, especially if the economy improves significantly in the short term.