1
MSC Maintenance Management
Systems and Life Cycle
Management
MSCHQ N711 & PM 1
Agenda
 Maintenance Management Policy
 Reliability Initiatives
 Life Cycle Management Planning
 N7 Maintenance Managem...
Policy:
Framework ~ MSC Mission
(Guiding Document)
3
Policy:
MSC’s Maintenance Philosophy
The people:
• Providing skilled, career, licensed marine
shipboard engineers
• Maint...
Policy:
MSC Maintenance Policy Documents
5
Policy:
MSC Maintenance Policy Documents
COMSC Instruction 47XX.X Ashore Maintenance Management
Policy
• Planned Maintena...
 More simply put, the 3-Rs:
The Right Maintenance
 on the Right Equipment,
 at the Right Time,
 Employ an efficient an...
Design/
Build
Storage MaintainOperate
Install/
Startup
Root Cause AnalysisLoss of Ship Availability and
Equipment Downtime...
9
Reliability:
MSC Maintenance
Technology Adoption Lifecycle
“Prove to me that failure won’t occur
if you change this.”
“Prove to me that failure will occur
if I change this.”
Limits ...
DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT MAINTENANCE?
How does this equipment effect our Maintenance Cost?
• Total Maintenance Cost
• Annual ...
LCM:
Background
 Life Cycle Plans intended to assist with Life Cycle
Management of all NFAF ships and to refine POM and
b...
13
LCM:
Current Status
 Way Ahead brief presented to COMSC
 Multi-year effort with contractor support required.
 Activa...
LCM:
Current Status (continued)
 Benchmarking with Commercial Industry and NAVSEA
Surface Ship Life Cycle Management (SSL...
LCM:
Way-Ahead
 Conduct market research to identify COTS software and contractor
support for Life Cycle Management planni...
LCM:
Way Ahead (Continued)
 Identify all Operational, Intermediate and Depot Level
Maintenance for T-AO Class from SAMM/P...
17
Integrate, Execute, Document and Feedback (MSFSC/PM1)
Technical Requirements
Execute
Plan Long Range Requirements into ...
18
19
 SAMM 5.07 Service Pack 3 Development
• Internet Browser Interface
• Dashboard
• Machinery History and Condition Monit...
20
N7 Maintenance Management Programs:
MSC IS Portal
Life Cycle Management
 Voyage Repair Request
21
Life Cycle Management
 Voyage Repair Request
Industrial Maintenance
(Depot & Intermediate)
N7 Maintenance Management ...
22
Life Cycle Management
 Voyage Repair Request
Industrial Maintenance
(Depot & Intermediate)
Service Orders
N7 Mainten...
23
February 2011:
TRANSALTs
 PENGWeb
N7 Maintenance Management Programs:
MSC IS Portal
USFFC:
Maintenance & Supply Working Group
IT EXCOMM
The MSWG vision is to develop an integrated naval maintenance
and supp...
USFFC:
Maintenance & Supply Working Group
IT Applications
25
•Common Technical Requirements
•Drives to Single Processes
•Reduces “Stovepipes”
•Increases Functionality
•Classified/Uncl...
USFFC:
MSWG Maintenance Strategy
27
28
Purpose : “ …to provide guidance on the most cost
effective standardize maintenance requirements and
assessment procedu...
Common Areas of Interest with MSC
 Upcoming NAVSEA Maintenance
Effectiveness Reviews
• Cargo/Weapon Elevators – Dec 6 – ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Randy torfin, lcm presentation

1,100

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,100
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
43
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Introduction of yourself and have the individuals in the audience introduce themselves.
    Discussion: As most of you know, MSC operates US Navy ships, mainly because we can do it effectively. MSC receives funding directly from the Navy, in support of the Navy & Marine Corps, and TransCom in support of the Army and Air Force.
    MSC Does fall under the Navy umbrella but OPNAV Instruction 4700.7K exempts MSC from Navy maintenance policies. MSC has the flexibility to establish its own policies and does as you will see in the following slides.
  • Discussion: MSC’s maintenance philosophy & policies are derived from MSC’s Mission-focused Value driven document (you each should have a copy in your padfolio). A couple of things I want to point out is that ship availability is paramount to successfully conduct iof MSC’s mission, the vision section supports innovation and cost effective solutions, and MSC under the “WE Value” sectionspecifically state “Our People”. This leads us into supporting documents such as;
  • Within the COMSC INSTRUCTION 4700.0, emphasis is placed in a couple of key areas, the first being that MSC’s leadership recognizes that it is the people of the organization that make us efficient, effective and unique. This is unique for a Navy organization as I have witnessed first hand when I was with NAVSEA. Going forward MSC is dedicated to doing a better job in promoting proactive thinking.
    (e.g.) For instance because we have skilled and licensed marine engineers the way MSC implements it’s vibration monitoring program is unique. We schedule test, provide our mariners with guidance on how to test each machine and provide a recommendation for the Chief or First Engineer to then make a decision on whether maintenance is required. In other organizations they have Vibration Analysis Experts come out and perform the test do the analysis and provide them with maintenance requirements. Both achieve the same result, but the MSC approach relies on the skills of the mariner and the knowledge of the licensed marine engineer.
  • COMSC INSTRUCTION 4700.0 – Signed April 2010 Defines our maintenance philosophy which I will go over in the next couple of slides. The Engineering Operations & Maintenance Manual promulgates this philoposphy and just in case it doesn’t it is in the process of being updated to ensure it is line with our philosophy.
  • From this philosophy we derive our maintenance strategy of the 3R’s. The right maintenance on the right equipment at the right time in an efficient and cost effective approach.
    There are a few definitions that are important and will come up again & again during this session.
    First, Maintenance is a set of actions that are accomplished on a component level to support the function of a system.
    Reliability is having those systems available when you need them.
    And function is the intended performance desired, not necessarily the designed capability.
    In other words we want to focus on maintaining the intended function of an system rather than its design performance. Many designs provide excess performance capacity or endurance as an inherent characteristic of the design.
    ( e.g.) the pump selected for a system may be rated at 100 gpm when the system design requirement is only 75 gpm. Maintenance that is oriented to sustaining excess capability, not needed for operations, expends resources without benefit. This is not good maintenance practice. An effective maintenance plan would eliminate unplanned corrective actions thereby increasing reliability
  • Maintenance will only eliminate a small percentage of the of the total defects in the equipment lifecycle.
    According to Ron Moore’s Book a best practice in implementing reliability is to look at incorporating the concepts of reliability into all of the process that introduce defects this will help MSC implement a maintenance strategy based on the economic management of equipment failure risk. We have pockets where we are doing this or have done this but there is no overarching strategy for the entire command.
    For instance
    Design/Build impact our TRANSALT process approving TRANSALTS only when we understand the defect/failure mode that we are looking to eliminate, prioritizing based on the safety, regulatory, operational and economic impact. We must understand the failure modes and or the root cause of the defects in order to eliminate them.
    Storage store the parts we need for the failure modes that we know occur in the fleet, monitor shelf life and quality of part delivered from the manufacturer
    Install/Start-up witting specification that place the risk on the supplier and validating that equipment is installed correctly using our condition monitoring tool.
    Operate equipment within it’s parameters, understanding the parameters specific tour our operating environment. De-rating equipment when our operating conditions call for it to maintain the reliability of the equipment. For example: reducing the through rate of the lube oil purfier and maintaining proper heater temperature to better purify the Main Engine Lubricating Oil and reduce main engine bearing wear. This has also be found to allow the ship to shut down the Aux. Boiler in Port during the summer months. Less Cycling of the Aux. Boiler will improve it’s reliability.
    Maintain this will only allow us to achieve the reliability that is inherit in the equipment. The goal here is to understand the failure mode, the risk and consequences of the failures and only perform the maintenance necessary to mitigate the risk and consequences of failure.
  • This slide represents MSC’s progression in the area of reliability and maintenance. Up until 1986 maintenance scheduling was not automated to ensure that maintenance tasks were visible, regularly scheduled or documented. It was ascertained that corrective maintenance was excessive and reduced reliability.
    In 1986 SAMM (Shipboard automated Maintenance Management) system was introduce to ensure that the maintenance was visible, scheduled and accomplished.
    In 1991 MSC introduced CBM tools, to help in scheduling additional maintenance tasks, to improve maintenance effectiveness and increase reliability.
    In 2001 MSC started introducing proactive maintenance efforts to prevent and detect the onset of or discover failures before they impact system performance to the point where an unsatisfactory condition exists. RCM or Reliability Centered Maintenance and Root cause analysis are proactive processing we are currently employing.
    Proactive - Root cause based & Reliability Focused (defect elimination)
    - Ideally PM is scheduled & performed only when it helps:
    - to detect onset of failure (e.g., PdM, inspections)
    - to avoid onset of failure (e.g., oil/filter changes)
    - from a known, consistent failure pattern (typically age or wear related failure mode)
    - PM based on collection maintenance data
    Maintenance: A reliability function not a repair function
  • During this week you will here about applicable and effective maintenance. This is were you can help as you will see in the next presentation by ------ . Your experience is invaluable and you can document that knowledge through the feedback process. Thank you, over and out!
  • Critical Equipment with High Life Cycle Cost, Low Operational Availability and Low Reliability should under go a Repair-vs-Replace analysis
    When considering TRANSALTs MSC should consider internal equipment with proven Reliability to replace equipment with problems
    Critical Equipment with a High greater than Annual Maintenance Cost, High CM to PM cost and Low Reliability should undergo a Maintenance Effectiveness Review
    Equipment with a low CM cost and a high PM Cost with a High Reliability should be considered for maintenance changes as part of a SAMM Audit
  • This is a graphical representation of the engineering applications that currently exist. We are in the process of updating the shore side SAMM application to a internet (cloud) based program that we currently call CM or the Corrective Maintenance application. Shore side Feedback module has been moved to CM and PENG is in the process of being moved. Also, we are developing a Transalt tracking application that will also be housed in CM.
    Back up (older stuff)
    Description of each application:
    Consolidated vs. Remote
    MSC IS Portal:
    MDST:
    Corrective maintenance: Bridge to SAMM to help streamline M&R processes
    PengWin:
    Snapshot:
    OAS:
    Combustion Analysis to MSC (on-demand)
    ShipClip is essentially the automated COSAL
    Supply Management is parts ordering
    DHAMS is used for M&R OT management and reporting
  • Remember we defined RCM as is a method for determining effective preventive maintenance requirements based on the analysis of the likely functional failures. Now we will discuss the RCM methodology in more detail
  • Randy torfin, lcm presentation

    1. 1. 1 MSC Maintenance Management Systems and Life Cycle Management MSCHQ N711 & PM 1
    2. 2. Agenda  Maintenance Management Policy  Reliability Initiatives  Life Cycle Management Planning  N7 Maintenance Management Programs USFFC Maintenance Initiatives 2
    3. 3. Policy: Framework ~ MSC Mission (Guiding Document) 3
    4. 4. Policy: MSC’s Maintenance Philosophy The people: • Providing skilled, career, licensed marine shipboard engineers • Maintaining trained, motivated and forward thinking shoreside management 4 The tools: • Providing technology and tools to analyze existing conditions and enhance maintenance planning and execution 4
    5. 5. Policy: MSC Maintenance Policy Documents 5
    6. 6. Policy: MSC Maintenance Policy Documents COMSC Instruction 47XX.X Ashore Maintenance Management Policy • Planned Maintenance Development Process • Maintenance Effectiveness Reviews • Maintenance Feedback Process • SAMM Audit • Post Availability Analysis • Work Item Library Management • Root Cause Analysis Implementation Process COMSC Instruction 3540.6A Engineering Operations and Maintenance Manual (EOMM) • Preventive Maintenance • Corrective Maintenance 6
    7. 7.  More simply put, the 3-Rs: The Right Maintenance  on the Right Equipment,  at the Right Time,  Employ an efficient and cost-effective maintenance approach that strives to ensure safety, meets regulatory requirements and supports reliability in support of MSC mission.  Maintenance: The set of actions taken to ensure that components, equipment and systems provide their intended functions when required.  Reliability: The ability of an item to perform a required function when needed.  Function: The intended action or operation which it is intended to perform. Policy: Maintenance Strategy 7
    8. 8. Design/ Build Storage MaintainOperate Install/ Startup Root Cause AnalysisLoss of Ship Availability and Equipment Downtime Unnecessary Maintenance and Repairs Defects DefectsDefects DefectsDefects Reliability: THE RELIABILITY PROCESS Source: Making Common Sense Common Practice 3rd Edition By Ron Moore Reliability Centered Maintenance Uptime & Necessary Work 8
    9. 9. 9 Reliability: MSC Maintenance Technology Adoption Lifecycle
    10. 10. “Prove to me that failure won’t occur if you change this.” “Prove to me that failure will occur if I change this.” Limits of Applicable and Effective Maintenance CM Cost PM Investment Total Maintenance Cost Cost $ 10 Reliability: Paradigm Shift
    11. 11. DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT MAINTENANCE? How does this equipment effect our Maintenance Cost? • Total Maintenance Cost • Annual Cost of Maintenance as a Percent of Asset Replacement Cost • PM cost vs. CM cost Does this equipment perform when I need it? • Operational Availability • Mean Time Between Failure • Mean Time To Repair What is the Reliability of the equipment at X hours of operation? • Reliability R(t) • Mean Time Between Failure 11 Reliability: Measures
    12. 12. LCM: Background  Life Cycle Plans intended to assist with Life Cycle Management of all NFAF ships and to refine POM and budget development.  Development of Life Cycle Plans for all NFAF ships identified as a FY 10 Corporate Plan Initiative, removed mid-year to be picked up in FY 11-12.  Life Cycle Plan development will be coordinated with MSFSC and N7. • Plans will also include regulatory body life cycle requirements. • Will benchmark with US Navy and commercial industry practices where possible • Reviewing Integrated Class Maintenance Plans (ICMP), met with Maersk Lines Limited 12
    13. 13. 13 LCM: Current Status  Way Ahead brief presented to COMSC  Multi-year effort with contractor support required.  Activation/Deactivation schedules identified for all classes SHIP CLASS EXPECTED SERVICE LIFE T-AKE 40 YEARS T-AOE 40 YEARS* T-AO 35 YEARS T-ATF 40 YEARS T-ARS 20 YEARS** T-AH 30 YEARS***  Critical equipment/systems (as found in SMS and SAMM records) have been identified for all ship classes  T-AOs identified as first class for Plan development • Contain most mature data, largest ship class and at midpoint of life cycle • As reported in POM 12 class beginning to experience life cycle issues * T –AOE Class commissioned 1994, MSC Operation 2001 ** T-ARS Class commissioned 1986, MSC Operation 2006 *** T-AH Class commissioned 1976, MSC Conversion 1986
    14. 14. LCM: Current Status (continued)  Benchmarking with Commercial Industry and NAVSEA Surface Ship Life Cycle Management (SSLCM) Activity continues  Mtg held end of Aug with Surface Maintenance Engineering Planning Program (SURFMEPP) formerly SSLCM to share information and ideas  Reviewing Technical Foundation Papers and Ship Sheets for methodology and processes  T-AKE Equipment Life Cycle Matrix being mapped to T-AO configuration 14
    15. 15. LCM: Way-Ahead  Conduct market research to identify COTS software and contractor support for Life Cycle Management planning  Shipping and Stationary Plant Industries  Conduct solicitation for software and contractor support if identified from market research  Using SAMM, PENG, and CMLS data for T-AO MPDE determine Total Maintenance Cost and Mean Time Between Repair (MTBR)  To include data external to systems such as service order data, tech reports, etc. for period prior to implementation of CMLS  Apply MTBR methodology to rest of critical equipment 15
    16. 16. LCM: Way Ahead (Continued)  Identify all Operational, Intermediate and Depot Level Maintenance for T-AO Class from SAMM/PENG/Service Orders and Port Engineers to Establish Baseline LCM Plan  Integrate T-AO OERA results, MSFSC 5-YR M&R data, and planned TRANSALTs into Life Cycle Plan  Present Life Cycle Plan for T-AO Class to All Stakeholders  Continue development for next ship class: T-AKE 16
    17. 17. 17 Integrate, Execute, Document and Feedback (MSFSC/PM1) Technical Requirements Execute Plan Long Range Requirements into Availabilities (PM1/N7/MSFSC) Document & Feedback Class LCM Requirements Ship LCM Baseline Schedule & POM Integrate Package Plan Availability Balancing Technical, Operational, and Financial Risk to increase Ao and decrease $$ LCM: Life Cycle Management Plan
    18. 18. 18
    19. 19. 19  SAMM 5.07 Service Pack 3 Development • Internet Browser Interface • Dashboard • Machinery History and Condition Monitoring Module Integration • Workbook, Maintenance, and Repair Module Integrated • Depot Level PM visible in Maintenance Module • Virtual Tech Library Integration  PENG Web Development  MSC IS Portal Development • Corrective Maintenance (Ashore PM Tool, TRANSALT Manager) • Condition Based Monitoring Analysis • Data Maintenance Manager • PENGWeb Integration in Corrective Maintenance • Virtual Tech Library Integration  SnapShot Development to combine SMART and OCI Inspection
    20. 20. 20 N7 Maintenance Management Programs: MSC IS Portal Life Cycle Management  Voyage Repair Request
    21. 21. 21 Life Cycle Management  Voyage Repair Request Industrial Maintenance (Depot & Intermediate) N7 Maintenance Management Programs: MSC IS Portal
    22. 22. 22 Life Cycle Management  Voyage Repair Request Industrial Maintenance (Depot & Intermediate) Service Orders N7 Maintenance Management Programs: MSC IS Portal
    23. 23. 23 February 2011: TRANSALTs  PENGWeb N7 Maintenance Management Programs: MSC IS Portal
    24. 24. USFFC: Maintenance & Supply Working Group IT EXCOMM The MSWG vision is to develop an integrated naval maintenance and supply IT solution set that aligns capability development to mission needs and delivers affordable enhancements through standardization of processes and tools, and cost efficiencies through IT automation.  Enterprise Options  A: All SAP  B: Some Maintenance in SAP / Some Bolt-Ons (w/Navy ERP Supply and Financials)  C: Existing IT Consolidation Plan (w/Navy ERP Supply and Financials)  D: Single GOTS Maintenance Solution (w/Navy ERP Supply and Financials)  Due to time constraints in support of POM 12 decision, options B and C will be the primary focus of the MSWG strategy 24
    25. 25. USFFC: Maintenance & Supply Working Group IT Applications 25
    26. 26. •Common Technical Requirements •Drives to Single Processes •Reduces “Stovepipes” •Increases Functionality •Classified/Unclassified •Shore and Deployable EnterpriseSolution (ERP+bolt-ons) EnterpriseSolution (ERP+bolt-ons) USFFC: MSWG Maintenance Strategy NumberofApps 400 300 200 100 0 2009 2016 MFOM SMLIS NALCOMIS NDMS 2012 2014 Transition to ERPTransition to ERP Group Apps into “Family of Systems” Reduce # Apps to Support Transition to Enterprise Solution Identify ERP Early Adopters Requirements ERP early adoptersERP early adopters MSC IT Align with ERPAlign with ERPReduce AppsReduce AppsGroupGroup 26
    27. 27. USFFC: MSWG Maintenance Strategy 27
    28. 28. 28 Purpose : “ …to provide guidance on the most cost effective standardize maintenance requirements and assessment procedures across Carrier, Submarine and Surface Ship Enterprises…. Activities — Identify Maintenance Requirements for Review — Conduct Maintenance Reviews using principles of RCM — Identify best practices for cross-enterprise implementation — Develop policies and other documentation to institutionalize the strategies and practices USFFC: Common Maintenance Planning Working Group
    29. 29. Common Areas of Interest with MSC  Upcoming NAVSEA Maintenance Effectiveness Reviews • Cargo/Weapon Elevators – Dec 6 – 10, 2010 • Reverse Osmosis – Aug 8 – 12, 2011 • Start Air Compressors – Sept 12 – 16, 2011  Upcoming Best Practices Sessions • Piping Nov 8 thru 11  Upcoming CMPWG briefing • CFFC – March 2011 USFFC: CMPWG Events 29
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×