|
1999 Design for Maintainability and Reliability Survey - Results
Ó
Plant Maintenance Resource Center
http://www.plant-maintenance.com
Author : Alexander (Sandy) Dunn
Plant Maintenance Resource Center Home
Maintenance Articles
Latest Plant Maintenance Resource Center Survey
The 1999 Plant Maintenance Resource Center Design for Maintainability and Reliability Center survey was open from May to October 1999. 50 valid responses were received. The results of the survey are discussed below.
Summary
Although, drawing conclusions from a small sample such as this is somewhat dangerous, the survey appeared to throw up one or two somewhat controversial findings:
- 18% of respondents regularly apply external standards for Design for Maintainability
- 42% of respondents regularly apply formally documented internal standards for Design for Maintainability
- 76% of respondents rate the maintainability of their plant and equipment as Good, Very Good or Excellent
- 84% of respondents rate the reliability of their plant and equipment as Good, Very Good or Excellent
- Generally, those respondents who indicated a higher use of formal design for maintainability processes (based on external or internal standards), rated the maintainability and reliability of their plant and equipment higher than those that did not use formal standards.
- Generally, Plant Reliability and Maintainability was rated higher by those respondents who indicated higher involvement in Design for Maintainability processes by Maintenance Managers, Maintenance Foremen and Supervisors.
- Controversially, based on the results recorded, it would appear that a higher level of involvement by Plant/Maintenance/Reliability Engineers in the Design for Maintainability process, while leading to higher reliability, had no impact on maintainability. Are our engineers too theoretical, and out of touch with the practical realities of the real world?
- Even more controversially, based on the results recorded, it would appear that a higher level of involvement by Maintenance Crafts/Tradespeople in the Design for Maintainability process actually leads to poorer equipment maintainability. Can anyone explain this?
Raw Data
The raw data collected is as follows:
Question 1 - Does your organisation adhere to Military or other external standards for Design for Maintainability/Reliability?
The results obtained show that there are a surprisingly high number of organisations (surprising to me, at least) adhering to external standards for Design for Maintainability/Reliability. As shown in the table and chart below, 18% of respondents indicated that they regularly complied with these standards, with a further 32% indicating that they occasionally complied.
Question 1
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Regularly |
9 |
18% |
| Occasionally |
16 |
32% |
| Never |
14 |
28% |
| Don't Know |
1 |
2% |
| N/A |
10 |
20% |
Question 2 - Does your organisation adhere to formal, documented internal company standards for Design for Maintainability/Reliability?
Once again, the results obtained show that there are a high number of organisations adhering to formal internal standards for Design for Maintainability/Reliability. As shown in the table and chart below, 42% of respondents indicated that they regularly complied with these standards, with a further 20% indicating that they occasionally complied.
Question 2
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Regularly |
21 |
42% |
| Occasionally |
10 |
20% |
| Never |
13 |
26% |
| Don't Know |
2 |
4% |
| N/A |
4 |
8% |
Question 3 - Does your organisation have formal design/purchase review processes involving Maintenance personnel?
A high number of organisations have formal design/purchase review processes involving Maintenance personnel, with 32% of respondents indicated that they regularly used these processes, and a further 32% indicating that they occasionally used them.
Question 3
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Regularly |
16 |
32% |
| Occasionally |
16 |
32% |
| Never |
11 |
22% |
| Don't Know |
0 |
0.0% |
| N/A |
7 |
14% |
Question 4 - Does your organisation have informal processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability?
The highest number of organisations use informal processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability, with 36% of respondents indicated that they regularly used these processes, and a further 44% indicating that they occasionally used them.
Question 4
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Regularly |
18 |
36% |
| Occasionally |
22 |
44% |
| Never |
3 |
6% |
| Don't Know |
1 |
2% |
| N/A |
6 |
12% |
Question 5 - Is the Maintenance Manager involved in your processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability?
Maintenance Managers appear to be highly involved in the processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability, with 36% of respondents indicated that they were always involved, and a further 16% indicating that they were usually involved.
Question 5
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Always |
18 |
36% |
| Usually |
8 |
16% |
| Occasionally |
15 |
30% |
| Never |
6 |
12% |
| Don't Know |
0 |
0.0% |
| N/A |
3 |
6% |
Question 6 - Is the Maintenance/Reliability/Plant Engineer involved in your processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability?
Engineers are also highly involved in the processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability, with 26% of respondents indicated that they were always involved, and a further 30% indicating that they were usually involved.
Question 6
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Always |
13 |
26% |
| Usually |
15 |
30% |
| Occasionally |
11 |
22% |
| Never |
1 |
2% |
| Don't Know |
1 |
2% |
| N/A |
9 |
18% |
Question 7 - Is the Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor involved in your processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability?
Supervisors are slightly less highly involved in the processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability, with 18% of respondents indicated that they were always involved, and a further 30% indicating that they were usually involved.
Question 7
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Always |
9 |
18% |
| Usually |
15 |
30% |
| Occasionally |
16 |
32% |
| Never |
5 |
10% |
| Don't Know |
0 |
0.0% |
| N/A |
5 |
10% |
Question 8 - Are Maintenance Craftsmen/Tradesmen involved in your processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability?
Craftsmen/Tradesmen are much less involved in processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability, with only 10% of respondents indicated that they were always involved, and a further 12% indicating that they were usually involved.
Question 8
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Always |
5 |
10% |
| Usually |
6 |
12% |
| Occasionally |
22 |
44% |
| Never |
10 |
20% |
| Don't Know |
0 |
0.0% |
| N/A |
13 |
26% |
Question 9 - How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment?
In this self assessment, most respondents considered the maintainability of their plant and equipment to be good, with 46% of respondents giving this response. 30% of respondents considered the maintainability of their plant to be very good or excellent.
Question 9
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Excellent |
2 |
4% |
| Very Good |
13 |
26% |
| Good |
23 |
46% |
| Poor |
12 |
24% |
| Very Poor |
0 |
0.0% |
Question 10 - How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment?
In this self assessment, most respondents considered the reliability of their plant and equipment to be good, with 52% of respondents giving this response. 32% of respondents considered the reliability of their plant to be very good or excellent.
Question 10
| Response |
No of Responses |
% of Total |
| Excellent |
6 |
12% |
| Very Good |
10 |
20% |
| Good |
26 |
52% |
| Poor |
8 |
16% |
| Very Poor |
0 |
0.0% |
Analysis
Cross tabulation of the results was undertaken, and these are documented below.
Impact of External Standards on Maintainability and Reliability
It is little surprise that those respondents that regularly adhered to external standards for maintainability and reliability generally tended to rate the maintainability and reliability of their plant and equipment higher than those that did not regularly adhere to external standards. The results are tabulated below.
Impact of External Standards on Maintainability
|
How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| Does your organisation adhere to Military or other external standards for Design for Maintainability/Reliability? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Regularly |
1 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
| Occasionally |
|
5 |
4 |
7 |
| Never |
|
1 |
11 |
2 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
1 |
|
| N/A |
1 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
Impact of External Standards on Reliability
|
How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| Does your organisation adhere to Military or other external standards for Design for Maintainability/Reliability? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Regularly |
2 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
| Occasionally |
2 |
2 |
7 |
5 |
| Never |
|
1 |
12 |
1 |
| Don't Know |
|
1 |
|
|
| N/A |
2 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
Impact of Internal Standards on Maintainability and Reliability
As with the previous question on external standards, those respondents that regularly adhered to formal internal standards for maintainability and reliability generally tended to rate the maintainability and reliability of their plant and equipment higher than those that did not regularly adhere to formal internal standards. The results are tabulated below.
Impact of internal company standards on Maintainability
|
How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| Does your organisation adhere to formal, documented internal company standards for Design for Maintainability/Reliability? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Regularly |
2 |
7 |
9 |
3 |
| Occasionally |
|
2 |
4 |
4 |
| Never |
|
1 |
8 |
4 |
| Don't Know |
|
1 |
|
1 |
| N/A |
|
2 |
2 |
|
Impact of internal company standards on Reliability
|
How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| Does your organisation adhere to formal, documented internal company standards for Design for Maintainability/Reliability? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Regularly |
4 |
6 |
9 |
2 |
| Occasionally |
|
1 |
7 |
2 |
| Never |
|
2 |
8 |
3 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
|
|
1 |
| N/A |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
Impact of Design Review Processes on Maintainability and Reliability
Once again, those respondents that regularly used formal design review processes generally tended to rate the maintainability and reliability of their plant and equipment higher than those that did not. The results are tabulated below.
Impact of formal design/purchase review process on Maintainability
|
How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| Does your organisation use a formal design/purchase review process involving Maintenance personnel? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Regularly |
1 |
4 |
10 |
1 |
| Occasionally |
|
6 |
5 |
5 |
| Never |
|
|
5 |
6 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
|
|
| N/A |
1 |
3 |
3 |
|
Impact of formal design/purchase review process on Reliability
|
How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| Does your organisation use a formal design/purchase review process involving Maintenance personnel? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Regularly |
2 |
4 |
9 |
1 |
| Occasionally |
1 |
3 |
7 |
5 |
| Never |
1 |
1 |
7 |
2 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
|
|
| N/A |
2 |
2 |
3 |
|
Impact of Informal Processes on Maintainability and Reliability
Even those respondents that regularly used informal processes for design for maintainability and reliability generally rated the maintainability and reliability of their plant and equipment higher than those that did not. The results are tabulated below.
Impact of informal processes on Maintainability
|
How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| Does your organisation use informal processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Regularly |
1 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
| Occasionally |
|
4 |
13 |
5 |
| Never |
|
|
1 |
2 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
1 |
|
| N/A |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Impact of informal processes on Reliability
|
How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| Does your organisation use informal processes for Design for Maintainability/Reliability? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Regularly |
4 |
4 |
7 |
3 |
| Occasionally |
1 |
4 |
12 |
5 |
| Never |
|
|
3 |
|
| Don't Know |
|
|
1 |
|
| N/A |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Impact of Maintenance Manager involvement on Maintainability and Reliability
Those respondents that had a higher involvement in the Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes generally rated the maintainability and reliability of their plant and equipment higher than those that did not. Could this be because most of the respondents in the survey were Maintenance Managers :-) ?. The results are tabulated below.
Impact of Maintenance Manager involvement on Maintainability
|
How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| How often is your Maintenance Manager involved in your Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Always |
1 |
8 |
8 |
1 |
| Usually |
|
3 |
4 |
1 |
| Occasionally |
1 |
1 |
5 |
8 |
| Never |
|
|
5 |
1 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
|
|
| N/A |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
Impact of Maintenance Manager involvement on Reliability
|
How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| How often is your Maintenance Manager involved in your Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Always |
2 |
8 |
7 |
1 |
| Usually |
1 |
|
7 |
|
| Occasionally |
2 |
2 |
5 |
6 |
| Never |
|
|
5 |
1 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
|
|
| N/A |
1 |
|
2 |
|
Impact of Maintenance/Reliability/Plant Engineer involvement on Maintainability and Reliability
A surprising result here. From the responses received here, it would appear that involving engineers in the Design for Maintainability/Reliability process has minimal impact on improving equipment maintainability (although it does appear to improve equipment reliability). Are our Maintenance engineers too often back-room boffins that don't really understand what is required in the real world? The results are tabulated below.
Impact of Maintenance/Reliability/Plant Engineer involvement on Maintainability
|
How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| How often is your Maintenance/Reliability/Plant Engineer involved in your Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Always |
|
4 |
5 |
4 |
| Usually |
1 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
| Occasionally |
|
1 |
9 |
1 |
| Never |
|
|
1 |
|
| Don't Know |
|
|
1 |
|
| N/A |
1 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
Impact of Maintenance/Reliability/Plant Engineer involvement on Reliability
|
How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| How often is your Maintenance/Reliability/Plant Engineer involved in your Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Always |
3 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
| Usually |
1 |
4 |
6 |
4 |
| Occasionally |
|
1 |
9 |
1 |
| Never |
|
|
1 |
|
| Don't Know |
|
|
1 |
|
| N/A |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
Impact of Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor involvement on Maintainability and Reliability
No surprises here, however. Based on the data from the survey, a higher level of involvement from Maintenance Foremen and Supervisors in the Design for Maintainability/Reliability process leads to improved equipment maintainability and reliability. The results are tabulated below.
Impact of Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor involvement on Maintainability
|
How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| How often is your Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor involved in your Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Always |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
| Usually |
|
4 |
10 |
1 |
| Occasionally |
|
4 |
5 |
7 |
| Never |
|
|
4 |
1 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
|
|
| N/A |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
Impact of Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor involvement on Reliability
|
How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| How often is your Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor involved in your Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Always |
3 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
| Usually |
|
4 |
11 |
|
| Occasionally |
2 |
2 |
7 |
5 |
| Never |
|
|
4 |
1 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
|
|
| N/A |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
Impact of Maintenance Craftsmen/Tradesmen involvement on Maintainability and Reliability
Another surprise here. If, as appeared to be the case above, involving engineers in the Design for Reliability/Maintainability process has minimal impact on equipment maintainability, it would appear from the data below, that involving craftsmen/tradesmen in the process on a regular basis actually leads to poorer equipment maintainability! Surely this cannot be right - can anyone please explain these findings?!! The results are tabulated below.
Impact of Maintenance Craftsmen/Tradesmen involvement on Maintainability
|
How would you rate the maintainability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| How often are your Maintenance Craftsmen/Tradesmen involved in your Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Always |
|
2 |
1 |
2 |
| Usually |
|
1 |
5 |
|
| Occasionally |
1 |
8 |
8 |
5 |
| Never |
|
|
6 |
4 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
|
|
| N/A |
1 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
Impact of Maintenance Craftsmen/Tradesmen involvement on Reliability
|
How would you rate the reliability of your plant and equipment? |
|---|
| How often are your Maintenance Craftsmen/Tradesmen involved in your Design for Maintainability/Reliability processes? |
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
| Always |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
| Usually |
|
2 |
4 |
|
| Occasionally |
3 |
6 |
8 |
5 |
| Never |
|
|
7 |
3 |
| Don't Know |
|
|
|
|
| N/A |
1 |
1 |
5 |
|
Ó
Plant Maintenance Resource Center 1999
All rights reserved.
If you wish to copy or distribute this article, please email me to ask for permission first!
(Permission will generally be granted, so long as appropriate credit is given to its origin).
Copyright 1996-2009, The Plant Maintenance Resource Center . All Rights Reserved.
Revised: Thursday, 08-Oct-2015 11:52:04 AEDT
Privacy Policy
| 
