In a past article,1 I mentioned that in the world of reliability, risk can be defined as the probability of failure multiplied by the consequence(s) of failure. This simple definition should be a reliability team’s most important daily metric. In this editorial, a two-dimensional matrix is proposed that serves as a real-time moving picture of the health of plant assets (Figure 1).

I don’t manage an in-plant machinery reliability team at Noria (we have no machines), but if I did, I would want to see this matrix at the beginning and end of each day. I would want it to serve as my reliability command post in planning and scheduling maintenance work orders and related activities.

Let’s call it the Risk Management Grid (RMG) for production assets. Its singular purpose is to characterize composite asset risk factors associated with failure probability and consequence. It provides a revealing cross-sectional view of current reliability conditions and leaves a visible trail of the past to analyze and prescribe future proactive improvement initiatives.

The post Managing Reliability in Real Time – The Risk Management Grid (RMG) appeared first on Tesibis.

For any given machine, how critical is its reliability? What if it failed suddenly and catastrophically?

What would be the consequences – lost production, expensive repairs, fatality? Criticality is the logical starting point for all reliability initiatives.

There are many different ways to enhance reliability and improve the quality of maintenance. The best options should be risk-based. After all, if it doesn’t reduce risk, why do it? Why spend an incremental dollar to enhance a machine’s reliability if it doesn’t yield multiple dollars in return?

There’s also priority. What should be done first, second and third, and what should not be done at all? How do you know which machines return big dollars for enhanced reliability, which machines return marginal dollars and which machines return nothing at all?

Once you understand machine criticality and a machine’s risk profile, you can work smarter to customize improvements. For guidance, look to the Pareto principle, which states that 20 percent of the machines cause 80 percent of the reliability problems. Which machines are these?

In addition, consider that 20 percent of the causes of failure are responsible for 80 percent of the occurrences of failure. Which causes are these? It’s about precision – precision maintenance and precision lubrication. It’s also knowing how to make wise, risk-informed choices.

The post A New Look at Criticality Analysis for Machinery Lubrication appeared first on Tesibis.