MAINTENANCE
PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION
An Maintenance Management
Project
By:
Shreya Anand
Vanshika Thakur
WHAT IS MAINTENANCE
EVALUATION?
• Analysis of current organizational
maintenance framework to asses the
required potential improvements to
achieve best possible Maintenance
Practice. [1] [2]
1. Dhillon, B. (2002). Engineering Maintenance – A Modern Approach. London; New York;Washington D.C: CRC Press. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from
http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/sabdelall/files/2010/02/Engineering_Maintenance_a_modern_approach.pdf
2. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019
NEED OF EVALUATION[1] [2]
1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved
March 24, 2019
2. Galar, D., Parida, A., Kumar, U., & Stenstrom, C. (n.d.). Maintenance Performance Metrics: A State of the Art Review. Retrieved March 25,
2019, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/65d3/5c09f9ccd068dafae30bc222b2c5fab9a3e1.pdf
Resources utilization
Effectiveness and Efficiency of
Maintenance.
Resource requirement of
manpower, equipments.
Comparison of maintenance
functions within and to other
organizations.
OBJECTIVES OF EVALUATION[1]
1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved
March 24, 2019
Avoiding overstaffing and understaffing
Setting standards for different types of work in
advance
Skill of the maintenance personnel
Spare part requirement
Maintenance type needed for a particular
equipment / system
Finding out the problems being faced by
management.
BENEFITS OF MAINTENANCE
EVALUATION [1]
1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved
March 24, 2019
Performance
Improvement
Reduction in Delay
Reduction in Equipment
Downtime
Improvement in
Preventive Maintenance
TYPES OF EVALUATION[1]
Through Reports
• The evaluation is
done on the basis
of reports which
are prepared at
fixed time intervals.
• Evaluation
depends upon the
accuracy of the
reports.
Subjective
Evaluation
• Qualitative type of
evaluation.
• Evaluation
depends upon the
expertise of the
subject,
qualifications of the
personnel and
training.
Objective Evaluation
• Qualitative
Evaluation
• Assess the
maintenance
costs.
• Indicate the
performance of
maintenance
personnel.
• Recognises
equipment
availability.
Work Auditing
• Total time of non-
availablity of
equipment and
time taken to
attend the fault is
analysed .
• Step by step
progress of
randomly selected
job is recorded to
highlight the delays
caused.
• Enables to identify
the weak points ,
where
improvements are
possible and
corrective actions
are initiated
accordingly.
Job Card Analysis
• Gives the detail of
time taken for each
job element and
deviation/delay
from the scheduled
time in starting or
in doing the job.
1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March
24, 2019
MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION FACTORS
Evaluation
Factors
Plant
Availabi
lity
MTTF/M
ean time
to
Failure
MTTR/
Mean
Time to
Repair
MWT/M
ean
Waiting
Time
MTBF
/Mean
time
before
Failure
OEE
/Over-all
equipme
nt
effective
ness
Cost of
Mainten
ance
Effective
ness of
Maintena
nce
Planning
Backlog
Econo
mic
MTTF / MEAN TIME TO FAILURE [1]
• Measure of reliability used for non-repairable systems.
• Represents the length of time that an item is expected to last in
operation until it fails.
• Refered to as the lifetime of any product or a device.
• Calculated by considering number of the same kind of items
over an extended period of time and seeing what is their mean
time to failure.
1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from
Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
MTTF / MEAN TIME TO FAILURE[1]
1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from
Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
MTTR / MEAN TIME TO REPAIR [1] [2]
• Average time required to
repair failed equipment and
return it to normal operating
conditions.
• It generally does not take into
account lead-time for parts.
• Reflects how well an
organization can respond to a
problem and repair it.
1. FIix. (n.d.). What is mean time to repair? Retrieved March 25, 2019, from Fiix: https://www.fiixsoftware.com/mean-time-to-repair-maintenance/
2. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble
CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
INCLUDES: [1]
Notification Time
Diagnostic Time
Fix Time
Wait Time
Reassembly
Alignment
Calibration
Test Time
Back to Production
MTTR /
MEAN
TIME TO
REPAIR
1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or
MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved
March 24, 2019, from Limble CMMS:
https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-
1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble
CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
MTTR / MEAN TIME TO
REPAIR[1]
OVER-ALL EQUIPMENT
EFFECTIVENESS[1]
• Gold standard for measuring manufacturing productivity.
• Identifies the percentage of manufacturing time that is truly
productive.
• Measuring OEE is a manufacturing best practice, for overcoming
the underlying losses.
• Helps improve manufacturing process.
1. Vorne. (n.d.). What is Overall Equipment Effectiveness? Retrieved March 27, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/
OVER-ALL EQUIPMENT
EFFECTIVENESS
• An OEE score of 100% means the company is
manufacturing only Good Parts, as fast as possible,
with no Stop Time. [1]
1. Vorne. (n.d.). What is Overall Equipment Effectiveness? Retrieved March 27, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/
100% Quality- Good
Parts
100% Performance-
As Fast as Possible
100% Availability-
With no Stop Time
Arruda, C. H. (2006). Maintenance Evaluation & Benchmarking. Chile: MAPLA. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from
http://www02.abb.com/global/clabb/clabb151.nsf/0/0b220da6e2e7ff65c12571f000643ea7/$file/maintenance+evaluation+&+benchmarking_MAPLA+presen
tation+version+r0.pdf
MTBF /MEAN TIME BETWEEN
FAILURES (SHUTDOWNS) [1]
• It is a measure of how reliable a product or component is.
• For most components, the measure is typically in thousands or
even tens of thousands of hours between failures.
• The MTBF figure can be developed as the result of intensive
testing, based on actual product experience.
1. Rouse, M. (2011, March). MTBF (mean time between failures). Retrieved March 25, 2019, from WhatIs.com:
https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/MTBF-mean-time-between-failures
1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble
CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
MTBF /MEAN TIME BETWEEN
FAILURES (SHUTDOWNS) [1]
MWT / MEAN WAITING TIME
• It is the application of probabilistic models to measure waiting
time problems, to compare two or more different service patterns.
[1]
1. Rosenberg, L. (1968). Mean Waiting Time as A Measure. Taylor and Francis. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2682020.pdf
FAILURE RATE[1]
• It is the anticipated number of times that an item fails in a
specified period of time.
• Calculated value -provides a measure of reliability for a product.
• Number of failures/ Total operating Hrs.
• Expressed as failures per million hours / failures per billion
hours.
1. ELSEVIER. (2004). Failure Rate. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from ScienceDirect: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/failure-rate
OTHER PARAMETERS[1] [2]
1. Vorne. (n.d.). What is TEEP? Retrieved March 25, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/teep.html
2. Fiix. (n.d.). Planned Maintenance Percentage. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from FIIX: https://www.fiixsoftware.com/advanced-cmms-metrics-
planned-maintenance-percentage/
• Time for which equipment
ran/time equipment was
available to run.
Equipment
Utilization-
• Total Man hr produced/Total
Man hr available.
Man Power
Efficiency
• Total Hr. spent on
emergency jobs/Total hrs.
worked on all the jobs.
Emergency
Repair %
Total Available Hours - Total Down-time
• Plant Availability = -------------------------------------------------------
Total Available Hours
• Backlog - Estimated man hrs for all jobs/Actual hrs available to schedule. [1] [2]
1. Dhillon, B. (2002). Engineering Maintenance – A Modern Approach. London; New York;Washington D.C: CRC Press. Retrieved
March 24, 2019, from http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/sabdelall/files/2010/02/Engineering_Maintenance_a_modern_approach.pdf
2. Crenger. (n.d.). Plant availability analysis demystified. Retrieved March 27, 2019, from http://www.crenger.com/paa.html
MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE
INDICES[1]
• These are criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of maintenance
called MEI (Maintenance Effectiveness Index)
• Quantitative based fixed criteria which consider a defined level of
maintenance functions and achieved objective.
• Helps to assess the level of effectiveness of the maintenance.
• Vary at different levels of maintenance department and industry.
1. Dhillon, B. (2002). Engineering Maintenance – A Modern Approach. London; New York;Washington D.C: CRC Press. Retrieved
March 24, 2019, from http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/sabdelall/files/2010/02/Engineering_Maintenance_a_modern_approach.pdf
KEY PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS[1]
KPIs indicate
• what Maintenance is doing
• what it is achieving for the business
• what more it can do to improve operational performance
1. Sondalini, M. (n.d.). Useful Key Performance Indicators for Maintenance. Australia. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from http://www.lifetime-
reliability.com/free-articles/maintenance-management/Useful_Key_Performance_Indicators_for_Maintenance.pdf
1. Sondalini, M. (n.d.). Useful Key Performance Indicators for Maintenance. Australia. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from http://www.lifetime-
reliability.com/free-articles/maintenance-management/Useful_Key_Performance_Indicators_for_Maintenance.pdf
Galar, D., Parida, A., Kumar, U., & Stenstrom, C. (n.d.). Maintenance Performance Metrics: A State of the Art Review. Retrieved March 25,
2019, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/65d3/5c09f9ccd068dafae30bc222b2c5fab9a3e1.pdf
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF
PERFORMANCE[1]
• Available information (past) is analysed for creating indices for
maintenance evaluation.
• Data considered – 6 months (more)
• Helps find out time lost in undesired activities
1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited.
Retrieved March 24, 2019
COST OF MAINTENANCE
EVALUATION[1]
• Cost of personnel employed for the evaluation
• Idle time cost of the maintenance workers for answering the
queries of the evaluation team
• The increased recurring maintenance costs due to revision of the
wage structure on account of the introduction of the new job
evaluations.
• Cost of maintaining the job evaluation team.
1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited.
Retrieved March 24, 2019
CASE -1[1]
1. Chen, F. L., & Chen, Y. C. (2010). Evaluating the Maintenance Performance of the Semiconductor Factories Based. American Journal
of Applied Sciences, 1-7. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.903.3003&rep=rep1&type=pdf
PROBLEM STATEMENT
• Maintenance being important in semiconductor factories because of
costs, need for the uninterrupted operation of semiconductor
equipment, and time and expense required for maintenance.
• If maintenance procedures were not performed properly, the
equipment would have low efficiency or break down, production
capacity would decrease and the company would incur extra costs.
• Therefore, the evaluation of maintenance performance had become
a critical issue in semiconductor industries.
APPROACH
• This study evaluated maintenance performance by using the
i. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP),
ii. Grey Relational Analysis (GRA)
iii. Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
(TOPSIS).
The weight of maintenance indicators was derived by AHP method,
which were input to the GRA and TOPSIS method for evaluate the
performance of Condition-Based Maintenance (CBM) and Time-
Based Maintenance (TBM) strategies.
RESULT
• Actual data was provided by a well-known semiconductor factory in
Taiwan.
• This study evaluated and compared the performance of different
maintenance strategies implemented in semiconductor companies.
• Indicated that the CBM strategy had better maintenance
performance than the TBM strategy in semiconductor companies
• Maintenance indicators which should be improved were also
identified.
CONCLUSION
• The feasibility of the maintenance evaluation method was
demonstrated through an actual scenario, to help managers
make decisions objectively and distinguish the advantages and
disadvantages of the maintenance strategy.
CASE STUDY - 2[1]
1. Oliveira, M., Lopes, I., & Rodrigues, C. (2016). Use of Maintenance Performance Indicators by Companies of the Industrial Hub of Manaus.
The Sixth International Conference on Changeable, Agile, Reconfigurable and Virtual Production (CARV2016), 52, 157-160. Retrieved from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827116308708
OBJECTIVE OF THE CASE
Objective of this research is to study the utilization of maintenance indicators
and the factors that hinder, encourage or facilitate its use.
To identify and analyze the use of maintenance performance indicators adopted
by companies of the industrial hub of Manaus in Brazil.
To identify behaviours of companies concerning the use of performance
indicators of the maintenance area (using questionnaire).
To identify dependence on the number of equipment, maintenance staff size,
Total Productive Maintenance adoption and Computerized Maintenance
Management utilization.
To observe Different behaviours concerning performance evaluation.
METHODOLOGY
Through a survey, data was collected about the
maintenance performance indicators adopted by the
maintenance area of companies .
Based on the obtained results, hypotheses are
tested in order to analyze if the adoption of
performance indicators is linked to companies
practices or characteristics such as size, number
of equipment, and use of a computerized
maintenance management system (CMMS),
among others
DATA COLLECTION
• There are approx 430 companies in the
industrial hub of Manaus.
• The questionnaire was sent to the
respective maintenance department.
• The sample had a total of 72
respondents, resulting in a response
rate of 16.74%.
Maintenance Performance Evaluation
Maintenance Performance Evaluation
Maintenance Performance Evaluation
CONCLUSION
With regard to performance indicator management, companies had many opportunities
for improving, by understanding the application of maintenance performance indicator
regardless of the sector of the company, its origin, its size, number of employees or
maintenance staff size.
Most companies that took part in the study had basic level of maintenance management,
which means that they can make improvements, become more competitive, increasing
throughput and reducing losses.
Performance indicators should be integrated and interdependent in order to provide an
overall perspective on the company’s goals, business strategies, and specific objectives.
Many companies needed a performance measurement system that pulls together all
parts of organization in a strategic model.
Maintenance performance measurement is needed for the purpose of giving quantitative
information about maintenance goals that can be reached and actions are needed to
improve the operation.
The frequency of use of performance indicators is low.
Also the companies do not recognize in general their low performances.
Based on hypotheses test, it was concluded that the use of performance indicators is
related with the number of equipment under maintenance responsibility, maintenance
staff size, TPM methodology adoption and CMMS utilization, varying in the same
direction.
It was also deducted that the origin of the companies influence the use and release of
performance indicators, since differences is observed on the answers to these
questions in local and international companies.
Indicators being used depends on the level of development of this area.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Arruda, C. H. (2006). Maintenance Evaluation & Benchmarking. Chile: MAPLA. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from
http://www02.abb.com/global/clabb/clabb151.nsf/0/0b220da6e2e7ff65c12571f000643ea7/$file/maintenance+evaluation+&+benc
hmarking_MAPLA+presentation+version+r0.pdf
• Chen, F. L., & Chen, Y. C. (2010). Evaluating the Maintenance Performance of the Semiconductor Factories Based. American
Journal of Applied Sciences, 1-7. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.903.3003&rep=rep1&type=pdf
• Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019,
from Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
• Crenger. (n.d.). Plant availability analysis demystified. Retrieved March 27, 2019, from http://www.crenger.com/paa.html
• Dhillon, B. (2002). Engineering Maintenance – A Modern Approach. London; New York;Washington D.C: CRC Press. Retrieved
March 24, 2019, from http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/sabdelall/files/2010/02/Engineering_Maintenance_a_modern_approach.pdf
• ELSEVIER. (2004). Failure Rate. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from ScienceDirect:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/failure-rate
• Fiix. (n.d.). Planned Maintenance Percentage. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from FIIX: https://www.fiixsoftware.com/advanced-
cmms-metrics-planned-maintenance-percentage/
• FIix. (n.d.). What is mean time to repair? Retrieved March 25, 2019, from Fiix: https://www.fiixsoftware.com/mean-time-to-repair-
maintenance/
BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Galar, D., Parida, A., Kumar, U., & Stenstrom, C. (n.d.). Maintenance Performance Metrics: A State of the Art Review.
Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/65d3/5c09f9ccd068dafae30bc222b2c5fab9a3e1.pdf
• Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private
Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019
• Oliveira, M., Lopes, I., & Rodrigues, C. (2016). Use of Maintenance Performance Indicators by Companies of the
Industrial Hub of Manaus. The Sixth International Conference on Changeable, Agile, Reconfigurable and Virtual
Production (CARV2016), 52, 157-160. Retrieved from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827116308708
• Rosenberg, L. (1968). Mean Waiting Time as A Measure. Taylor and Francis. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2682020.pdf
• Rouse, M. (2011, March). MTBF (mean time between failures). Retrieved March 25, 2019, from WhatIs.com:
https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/MTBF-mean-time-between-failures
• Sondalini, M. (n.d.). Useful Key Performance Indicators for Maintenance. Australia. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from
http://www.lifetime-reliability.com/free-articles/maintenance-
management/Useful_Key_Performance_Indicators_for_Maintenance.pdf
• Vorne. (n.d.). What is Overall Equipment Effectiveness? Retrieved March 27, 2019, from OEE.com:
https://www.oee.com/
• Vorne. (n.d.). What is TEEP? Retrieved March 25, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/teep.html
THANK YOU!!!

More Related Content

PPTX
Availability and reliability
PPT
Maintenance management- Production Management
DOC
Corrective maintenance
PPTX
Corrective maintenance
PPT
17.maintenance and reliability
PPT
Ch13 Reliability
PPTX
Implementing effective preventive and predictive maintenance programs
PPTX
Maintenace management and TPM
Availability and reliability
Maintenance management- Production Management
Corrective maintenance
Corrective maintenance
17.maintenance and reliability
Ch13 Reliability
Implementing effective preventive and predictive maintenance programs
Maintenace management and TPM

What's hot (20)

PDF
TPM 4 - Jishu-Hozen
PPTX
PPT Presentation on IATF 16949 Documentation
PDF
Maintenance Autonomous
PPTX
GD&T - PPT
PDF
8 Steps To Success In Maintenance Planning And Scheduling
PDF
Advanced Product Quality Planning presentation
PPT
PPTX
TIME STUDY
PDF
CELLULAR MANUFACTURING & FLEXIBLE MANUFACTURING SYSTEM - UNIT 5 - CAD & M
PPT
Reliability centred maintenance
PPTX
Work study and ergonomics
PPTX
TPM - Total Productive Maintenance
PDF
Quality Circle Presentation Template
PDF
Basics of Industrial Engineering
PDF
5S Auditing Sheet
PPTX
Root cause analysis - tools and process
PPT
Gage r&r
PPTX
Autonomous maintenance Jishu Hozen
PDF
Predictive Maintenance vs Preventive Maintenance
TPM 4 - Jishu-Hozen
PPT Presentation on IATF 16949 Documentation
Maintenance Autonomous
GD&T - PPT
8 Steps To Success In Maintenance Planning And Scheduling
Advanced Product Quality Planning presentation
TIME STUDY
CELLULAR MANUFACTURING & FLEXIBLE MANUFACTURING SYSTEM - UNIT 5 - CAD & M
Reliability centred maintenance
Work study and ergonomics
TPM - Total Productive Maintenance
Quality Circle Presentation Template
Basics of Industrial Engineering
5S Auditing Sheet
Root cause analysis - tools and process
Gage r&r
Autonomous maintenance Jishu Hozen
Predictive Maintenance vs Preventive Maintenance
Ad

Similar to Maintenance Performance Evaluation (20)

PPTX
New PPTX Presentation for power plants engineers
PPTX
MTBF vs MTTR.pptx
PPTX
MTTR & MTBF pptx mean to time repair to analyse
PPTX
Maintenance and Repair strategies for Reliability.pptx
PDF
Reliability_coefficient_MTBF_MTTF__1712590160.pdf
PDF
What is a Key Performance Indicator? Cost of Quality.pdf
PPTX
PDF
Maintenance_KPI.pdf
PPTX
PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES OF MAINTENANCE PLANNING
PDF
Principles and practices of maintenance planning
PPT
Three primary steps in maintenance reliability engineering
PPT
Revised Reliability Presentation (1).ppt
PDF
Guidelines to Understanding to estimate MTBF
PPTX
Basic Maintenance
PDF
Concepts of_Maintenance key performance indicators (KPIs_ (1).pdf
PPT
Kpi familiarization
PPTX
Aircraft condition monitoring (CM) is a predictive maintenance tool that help...
PDF
Beyond The Mean Time To Recover
PDF
Simple guide to MTBF – What it is and when to use it
New PPTX Presentation for power plants engineers
MTBF vs MTTR.pptx
MTTR & MTBF pptx mean to time repair to analyse
Maintenance and Repair strategies for Reliability.pptx
Reliability_coefficient_MTBF_MTTF__1712590160.pdf
What is a Key Performance Indicator? Cost of Quality.pdf
Maintenance_KPI.pdf
PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES OF MAINTENANCE PLANNING
Principles and practices of maintenance planning
Three primary steps in maintenance reliability engineering
Revised Reliability Presentation (1).ppt
Guidelines to Understanding to estimate MTBF
Basic Maintenance
Concepts of_Maintenance key performance indicators (KPIs_ (1).pdf
Kpi familiarization
Aircraft condition monitoring (CM) is a predictive maintenance tool that help...
Beyond The Mean Time To Recover
Simple guide to MTBF – What it is and when to use it
Ad

More from Shreya Anand (8)

PPTX
Production layouts
PPTX
Quality guru Joseph M
PDF
Micro Encapsulation Technique in Textile Finishing
PDF
CSR Activities of Brands
PDF
Milling of wool
PDF
Shrinkage Control
PDF
Woolen vs worsted Fibres
PDF
Material handling systems & Advancements
Production layouts
Quality guru Joseph M
Micro Encapsulation Technique in Textile Finishing
CSR Activities of Brands
Milling of wool
Shrinkage Control
Woolen vs worsted Fibres
Material handling systems & Advancements

Recently uploaded (20)

PPT
REGULATION OF RESPIRATION lecture note 200L [Autosaved]-1-1.ppt
PDF
Myanmar Dental Journal, The Journal of the Myanmar Dental Association (2013).pdf
PDF
Skin Care and Cosmetic Ingredients Dictionary ( PDFDrive ).pdf
PDF
Myanmar Dental Journal, The Journal of the Myanmar Dental Association (2015).pdf
PDF
LIFE & LIVING TRILOGY - PART - (2) THE PURPOSE OF LIFE.pdf
PDF
Farming Based Livelihood Systems English Notes
PPTX
UNIT_2-__LIPIDS[1].pptx.................
PDF
The TKT Course. Modules 1, 2, 3.for self study
PDF
Solved Past paper of Pediatric Health Nursing PHN BS Nursing 5th Semester
PDF
fundamentals-of-heat-and-mass-transfer-6th-edition_incropera.pdf
PDF
Mucosal Drug Delivery system_NDDS_BPHARMACY__SEM VII_PCI Syllabus.pdf
PDF
Health aspects of bilberry: A review on its general benefits
PPTX
BSCE 2 NIGHT (CHAPTER 2) just cases.pptx
PDF
Horaris_Grups_25-26_Definitiu_15_07_25.pdf
PDF
Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery at WLH Hospital
PPTX
Diploma pharmaceutics notes..helps diploma students
PDF
Journal of Dental Science - UDMY (2020).pdf
PDF
MICROENCAPSULATION_NDDS_BPHARMACY__SEM VII_PCI Syllabus.pdf
PDF
Nurlina - Urban Planner Portfolio (english ver)
PDF
Fun with Grammar (Communicative Activities for the Azar Grammar Series)
REGULATION OF RESPIRATION lecture note 200L [Autosaved]-1-1.ppt
Myanmar Dental Journal, The Journal of the Myanmar Dental Association (2013).pdf
Skin Care and Cosmetic Ingredients Dictionary ( PDFDrive ).pdf
Myanmar Dental Journal, The Journal of the Myanmar Dental Association (2015).pdf
LIFE & LIVING TRILOGY - PART - (2) THE PURPOSE OF LIFE.pdf
Farming Based Livelihood Systems English Notes
UNIT_2-__LIPIDS[1].pptx.................
The TKT Course. Modules 1, 2, 3.for self study
Solved Past paper of Pediatric Health Nursing PHN BS Nursing 5th Semester
fundamentals-of-heat-and-mass-transfer-6th-edition_incropera.pdf
Mucosal Drug Delivery system_NDDS_BPHARMACY__SEM VII_PCI Syllabus.pdf
Health aspects of bilberry: A review on its general benefits
BSCE 2 NIGHT (CHAPTER 2) just cases.pptx
Horaris_Grups_25-26_Definitiu_15_07_25.pdf
Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery at WLH Hospital
Diploma pharmaceutics notes..helps diploma students
Journal of Dental Science - UDMY (2020).pdf
MICROENCAPSULATION_NDDS_BPHARMACY__SEM VII_PCI Syllabus.pdf
Nurlina - Urban Planner Portfolio (english ver)
Fun with Grammar (Communicative Activities for the Azar Grammar Series)

Maintenance Performance Evaluation

  • 2. WHAT IS MAINTENANCE EVALUATION? • Analysis of current organizational maintenance framework to asses the required potential improvements to achieve best possible Maintenance Practice. [1] [2] 1. Dhillon, B. (2002). Engineering Maintenance – A Modern Approach. London; New York;Washington D.C: CRC Press. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/sabdelall/files/2010/02/Engineering_Maintenance_a_modern_approach.pdf 2. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019
  • 3. NEED OF EVALUATION[1] [2] 1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019 2. Galar, D., Parida, A., Kumar, U., & Stenstrom, C. (n.d.). Maintenance Performance Metrics: A State of the Art Review. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/65d3/5c09f9ccd068dafae30bc222b2c5fab9a3e1.pdf Resources utilization Effectiveness and Efficiency of Maintenance. Resource requirement of manpower, equipments. Comparison of maintenance functions within and to other organizations.
  • 4. OBJECTIVES OF EVALUATION[1] 1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019 Avoiding overstaffing and understaffing Setting standards for different types of work in advance Skill of the maintenance personnel Spare part requirement Maintenance type needed for a particular equipment / system Finding out the problems being faced by management.
  • 5. BENEFITS OF MAINTENANCE EVALUATION [1] 1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019 Performance Improvement Reduction in Delay Reduction in Equipment Downtime Improvement in Preventive Maintenance
  • 6. TYPES OF EVALUATION[1] Through Reports • The evaluation is done on the basis of reports which are prepared at fixed time intervals. • Evaluation depends upon the accuracy of the reports. Subjective Evaluation • Qualitative type of evaluation. • Evaluation depends upon the expertise of the subject, qualifications of the personnel and training. Objective Evaluation • Qualitative Evaluation • Assess the maintenance costs. • Indicate the performance of maintenance personnel. • Recognises equipment availability. Work Auditing • Total time of non- availablity of equipment and time taken to attend the fault is analysed . • Step by step progress of randomly selected job is recorded to highlight the delays caused. • Enables to identify the weak points , where improvements are possible and corrective actions are initiated accordingly. Job Card Analysis • Gives the detail of time taken for each job element and deviation/delay from the scheduled time in starting or in doing the job. 1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019
  • 7. MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FACTORS Evaluation Factors Plant Availabi lity MTTF/M ean time to Failure MTTR/ Mean Time to Repair MWT/M ean Waiting Time MTBF /Mean time before Failure OEE /Over-all equipme nt effective ness Cost of Mainten ance Effective ness of Maintena nce Planning Backlog Econo mic
  • 8. MTTF / MEAN TIME TO FAILURE [1] • Measure of reliability used for non-repairable systems. • Represents the length of time that an item is expected to last in operation until it fails. • Refered to as the lifetime of any product or a device. • Calculated by considering number of the same kind of items over an extended period of time and seeing what is their mean time to failure. 1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
  • 9. MTTF / MEAN TIME TO FAILURE[1] 1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
  • 10. MTTR / MEAN TIME TO REPAIR [1] [2] • Average time required to repair failed equipment and return it to normal operating conditions. • It generally does not take into account lead-time for parts. • Reflects how well an organization can respond to a problem and repair it. 1. FIix. (n.d.). What is mean time to repair? Retrieved March 25, 2019, from Fiix: https://www.fiixsoftware.com/mean-time-to-repair-maintenance/ 2. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/
  • 11. INCLUDES: [1] Notification Time Diagnostic Time Fix Time Wait Time Reassembly Alignment Calibration Test Time Back to Production MTTR / MEAN TIME TO REPAIR 1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-
  • 12. 1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/ MTTR / MEAN TIME TO REPAIR[1]
  • 13. OVER-ALL EQUIPMENT EFFECTIVENESS[1] • Gold standard for measuring manufacturing productivity. • Identifies the percentage of manufacturing time that is truly productive. • Measuring OEE is a manufacturing best practice, for overcoming the underlying losses. • Helps improve manufacturing process. 1. Vorne. (n.d.). What is Overall Equipment Effectiveness? Retrieved March 27, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/
  • 14. OVER-ALL EQUIPMENT EFFECTIVENESS • An OEE score of 100% means the company is manufacturing only Good Parts, as fast as possible, with no Stop Time. [1] 1. Vorne. (n.d.). What is Overall Equipment Effectiveness? Retrieved March 27, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/ 100% Quality- Good Parts 100% Performance- As Fast as Possible 100% Availability- With no Stop Time
  • 15. Arruda, C. H. (2006). Maintenance Evaluation & Benchmarking. Chile: MAPLA. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from http://www02.abb.com/global/clabb/clabb151.nsf/0/0b220da6e2e7ff65c12571f000643ea7/$file/maintenance+evaluation+&+benchmarking_MAPLA+presen tation+version+r0.pdf
  • 16. MTBF /MEAN TIME BETWEEN FAILURES (SHUTDOWNS) [1] • It is a measure of how reliable a product or component is. • For most components, the measure is typically in thousands or even tens of thousands of hours between failures. • The MTBF figure can be developed as the result of intensive testing, based on actual product experience. 1. Rouse, M. (2011, March). MTBF (mean time between failures). Retrieved March 25, 2019, from WhatIs.com: https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/MTBF-mean-time-between-failures
  • 17. 1. Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/ MTBF /MEAN TIME BETWEEN FAILURES (SHUTDOWNS) [1]
  • 18. MWT / MEAN WAITING TIME • It is the application of probabilistic models to measure waiting time problems, to compare two or more different service patterns. [1] 1. Rosenberg, L. (1968). Mean Waiting Time as A Measure. Taylor and Francis. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2682020.pdf
  • 19. FAILURE RATE[1] • It is the anticipated number of times that an item fails in a specified period of time. • Calculated value -provides a measure of reliability for a product. • Number of failures/ Total operating Hrs. • Expressed as failures per million hours / failures per billion hours. 1. ELSEVIER. (2004). Failure Rate. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from ScienceDirect: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/failure-rate
  • 20. OTHER PARAMETERS[1] [2] 1. Vorne. (n.d.). What is TEEP? Retrieved March 25, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/teep.html 2. Fiix. (n.d.). Planned Maintenance Percentage. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from FIIX: https://www.fiixsoftware.com/advanced-cmms-metrics- planned-maintenance-percentage/ • Time for which equipment ran/time equipment was available to run. Equipment Utilization- • Total Man hr produced/Total Man hr available. Man Power Efficiency • Total Hr. spent on emergency jobs/Total hrs. worked on all the jobs. Emergency Repair %
  • 21. Total Available Hours - Total Down-time • Plant Availability = ------------------------------------------------------- Total Available Hours • Backlog - Estimated man hrs for all jobs/Actual hrs available to schedule. [1] [2] 1. Dhillon, B. (2002). Engineering Maintenance – A Modern Approach. London; New York;Washington D.C: CRC Press. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/sabdelall/files/2010/02/Engineering_Maintenance_a_modern_approach.pdf 2. Crenger. (n.d.). Plant availability analysis demystified. Retrieved March 27, 2019, from http://www.crenger.com/paa.html
  • 22. MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE INDICES[1] • These are criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of maintenance called MEI (Maintenance Effectiveness Index) • Quantitative based fixed criteria which consider a defined level of maintenance functions and achieved objective. • Helps to assess the level of effectiveness of the maintenance. • Vary at different levels of maintenance department and industry. 1. Dhillon, B. (2002). Engineering Maintenance – A Modern Approach. London; New York;Washington D.C: CRC Press. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/sabdelall/files/2010/02/Engineering_Maintenance_a_modern_approach.pdf
  • 23. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS[1] KPIs indicate • what Maintenance is doing • what it is achieving for the business • what more it can do to improve operational performance 1. Sondalini, M. (n.d.). Useful Key Performance Indicators for Maintenance. Australia. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from http://www.lifetime- reliability.com/free-articles/maintenance-management/Useful_Key_Performance_Indicators_for_Maintenance.pdf
  • 24. 1. Sondalini, M. (n.d.). Useful Key Performance Indicators for Maintenance. Australia. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from http://www.lifetime- reliability.com/free-articles/maintenance-management/Useful_Key_Performance_Indicators_for_Maintenance.pdf
  • 25. Galar, D., Parida, A., Kumar, U., & Stenstrom, C. (n.d.). Maintenance Performance Metrics: A State of the Art Review. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/65d3/5c09f9ccd068dafae30bc222b2c5fab9a3e1.pdf
  • 26. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE[1] • Available information (past) is analysed for creating indices for maintenance evaluation. • Data considered – 6 months (more) • Helps find out time lost in undesired activities 1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019
  • 27. COST OF MAINTENANCE EVALUATION[1] • Cost of personnel employed for the evaluation • Idle time cost of the maintenance workers for answering the queries of the evaluation team • The increased recurring maintenance costs due to revision of the wage structure on account of the introduction of the new job evaluations. • Cost of maintaining the job evaluation team. 1. Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019
  • 28. CASE -1[1] 1. Chen, F. L., & Chen, Y. C. (2010). Evaluating the Maintenance Performance of the Semiconductor Factories Based. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 1-7. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.903.3003&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  • 29. PROBLEM STATEMENT • Maintenance being important in semiconductor factories because of costs, need for the uninterrupted operation of semiconductor equipment, and time and expense required for maintenance. • If maintenance procedures were not performed properly, the equipment would have low efficiency or break down, production capacity would decrease and the company would incur extra costs. • Therefore, the evaluation of maintenance performance had become a critical issue in semiconductor industries.
  • 30. APPROACH • This study evaluated maintenance performance by using the i. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), ii. Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) iii. Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). The weight of maintenance indicators was derived by AHP method, which were input to the GRA and TOPSIS method for evaluate the performance of Condition-Based Maintenance (CBM) and Time- Based Maintenance (TBM) strategies.
  • 31. RESULT • Actual data was provided by a well-known semiconductor factory in Taiwan. • This study evaluated and compared the performance of different maintenance strategies implemented in semiconductor companies. • Indicated that the CBM strategy had better maintenance performance than the TBM strategy in semiconductor companies • Maintenance indicators which should be improved were also identified.
  • 32. CONCLUSION • The feasibility of the maintenance evaluation method was demonstrated through an actual scenario, to help managers make decisions objectively and distinguish the advantages and disadvantages of the maintenance strategy.
  • 33. CASE STUDY - 2[1] 1. Oliveira, M., Lopes, I., & Rodrigues, C. (2016). Use of Maintenance Performance Indicators by Companies of the Industrial Hub of Manaus. The Sixth International Conference on Changeable, Agile, Reconfigurable and Virtual Production (CARV2016), 52, 157-160. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827116308708
  • 34. OBJECTIVE OF THE CASE Objective of this research is to study the utilization of maintenance indicators and the factors that hinder, encourage or facilitate its use. To identify and analyze the use of maintenance performance indicators adopted by companies of the industrial hub of Manaus in Brazil. To identify behaviours of companies concerning the use of performance indicators of the maintenance area (using questionnaire). To identify dependence on the number of equipment, maintenance staff size, Total Productive Maintenance adoption and Computerized Maintenance Management utilization. To observe Different behaviours concerning performance evaluation.
  • 35. METHODOLOGY Through a survey, data was collected about the maintenance performance indicators adopted by the maintenance area of companies . Based on the obtained results, hypotheses are tested in order to analyze if the adoption of performance indicators is linked to companies practices or characteristics such as size, number of equipment, and use of a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS), among others
  • 36. DATA COLLECTION • There are approx 430 companies in the industrial hub of Manaus. • The questionnaire was sent to the respective maintenance department. • The sample had a total of 72 respondents, resulting in a response rate of 16.74%.
  • 40. CONCLUSION With regard to performance indicator management, companies had many opportunities for improving, by understanding the application of maintenance performance indicator regardless of the sector of the company, its origin, its size, number of employees or maintenance staff size. Most companies that took part in the study had basic level of maintenance management, which means that they can make improvements, become more competitive, increasing throughput and reducing losses. Performance indicators should be integrated and interdependent in order to provide an overall perspective on the company’s goals, business strategies, and specific objectives. Many companies needed a performance measurement system that pulls together all parts of organization in a strategic model. Maintenance performance measurement is needed for the purpose of giving quantitative information about maintenance goals that can be reached and actions are needed to improve the operation.
  • 41. The frequency of use of performance indicators is low. Also the companies do not recognize in general their low performances. Based on hypotheses test, it was concluded that the use of performance indicators is related with the number of equipment under maintenance responsibility, maintenance staff size, TPM methodology adoption and CMMS utilization, varying in the same direction. It was also deducted that the origin of the companies influence the use and release of performance indicators, since differences is observed on the answers to these questions in local and international companies. Indicators being used depends on the level of development of this area.
  • 42. BIBLIOGRAPHY • Arruda, C. H. (2006). Maintenance Evaluation & Benchmarking. Chile: MAPLA. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from http://www02.abb.com/global/clabb/clabb151.nsf/0/0b220da6e2e7ff65c12571f000643ea7/$file/maintenance+evaluation+&+benc hmarking_MAPLA+presentation+version+r0.pdf • Chen, F. L., & Chen, Y. C. (2010). Evaluating the Maintenance Performance of the Semiconductor Factories Based. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 1-7. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.903.3003&rep=rep1&type=pdf • Christiansen, B. (2018, August 10). MTTR, MTBF, or MTTF? – A Simple Guide To Failure Metrics. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from Limble CMMS: https://limblecmms.com/blog/mttr-mtbf-mttf-guide-to-failure-metrics/ • Crenger. (n.d.). Plant availability analysis demystified. Retrieved March 27, 2019, from http://www.crenger.com/paa.html • Dhillon, B. (2002). Engineering Maintenance – A Modern Approach. London; New York;Washington D.C: CRC Press. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/sabdelall/files/2010/02/Engineering_Maintenance_a_modern_approach.pdf • ELSEVIER. (2004). Failure Rate. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from ScienceDirect: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/failure-rate • Fiix. (n.d.). Planned Maintenance Percentage. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from FIIX: https://www.fiixsoftware.com/advanced- cmms-metrics-planned-maintenance-percentage/ • FIix. (n.d.). What is mean time to repair? Retrieved March 25, 2019, from Fiix: https://www.fiixsoftware.com/mean-time-to-repair- maintenance/
  • 43. BIBLIOGRAPHY • Galar, D., Parida, A., Kumar, U., & Stenstrom, C. (n.d.). Maintenance Performance Metrics: A State of the Art Review. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/65d3/5c09f9ccd068dafae30bc222b2c5fab9a3e1.pdf • Mishra, R., & Pathak, K. (2013). Maintenance Engineering and Management (2 ed.). Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited. Retrieved March 24, 2019 • Oliveira, M., Lopes, I., & Rodrigues, C. (2016). Use of Maintenance Performance Indicators by Companies of the Industrial Hub of Manaus. The Sixth International Conference on Changeable, Agile, Reconfigurable and Virtual Production (CARV2016), 52, 157-160. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827116308708 • Rosenberg, L. (1968). Mean Waiting Time as A Measure. Taylor and Francis. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2682020.pdf • Rouse, M. (2011, March). MTBF (mean time between failures). Retrieved March 25, 2019, from WhatIs.com: https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/MTBF-mean-time-between-failures • Sondalini, M. (n.d.). Useful Key Performance Indicators for Maintenance. Australia. Retrieved March 26, 2019, from http://www.lifetime-reliability.com/free-articles/maintenance- management/Useful_Key_Performance_Indicators_for_Maintenance.pdf • Vorne. (n.d.). What is Overall Equipment Effectiveness? Retrieved March 27, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/ • Vorne. (n.d.). What is TEEP? Retrieved March 25, 2019, from OEE.com: https://www.oee.com/teep.html