Produced by:Platinum SponsorPremier SponsorLeveraging SAP to Support ReliabilityAnalyticsChris Zawislak & Mike PolandConAgra Foods, Inc Life Cycle Engineering, Inc.
• ConAgra Overview• Taxonomy• Criticality• Workflows• Key points to take home• QuestionsWhat I’ll Cover
ConAgra Foods overviewSlide 3ConAgra Foods started in 1919 as Nebraska Consolidated Mills. In 1971 it was renamedConAgra, Inc., and the company became ConAgra Foods in 2000.ConAgra Foods is a Fortune 500 company with more than 24,000 employees, with thecompany’s world headquarters located in Omaha, Neb.ConAgra Foods is one of North America’s leading food companies, with brands in 97 percentof America’s households.In fiscal year 2010, ConAgra Foods brought in $12+ billion in net sales.
Introduction & OverviewExecutive Vision• Leverage CPS toimprove performance• Leverage SAP to drivecost down
Situation• 2007 PM Pillar established• Working to establish foundation (PM Step 1)• Implemented SAP across consumer plants• Currently working to develop reliability competencies• SAP configuration was adequate to support foundationbut requires optimization to support reliability analyticsand other continuous improvement activities
SAP PMRisk AnalysisFailure Mode andEffect AnalysisSeverity ofFailureLikelihood ofOccurrenceDelectability ofFailureRisk Ranking Control PlansReliabilityAnalysisAsset Module ofEAMContinuous ImprovementFunctionalHierarchyCriticalityAnalysisReliability Maturity
ActionCreate a Reliability Center of Excellence• Reliability Action Team• Reliability Focus Team• Reliability Engineering function and resourcedevelopment• Reliability Infrastructure – SAP Configuration Taxonomy Criticality Workflows
Slide 11Taxonomy“Systematic classification of items into generic groupsbased on factors possibly common to several of theitems”ISO 14224, Petroleum and natural gas industries — Collection andexchange of reliability and maintenance data for equipment
Slide 12Hierarchy(1)BusinessCategory(2)Installation/Business Unit(3)Cost Center/ Op Unit(4)Function(5)System/ Process Line(6)Sub system/Asset/Equipment(7)Component/Maintainable Item(8)Part/ BOMUse/LocationDataEquipmentSubdivisionTaxonomy per ISO 14224:2006
FMEA to SAPSlide 14FAILURE MODE(FUNCTIONAL FAILURE) POTENTIAL CAUSE(S) CURRENT CONTROL(S)SEVERITYPROBABILITYDETECTIONRISK PRIORITY NUMBERSTRATEGY:CM ‐ Corrective (RTF)PM ‐ Time BasedCBM ‐ Condition BasedMOD ‐ ModificationTHERMOGRAPHYVIBRATION ANALYSISULTRASOUNDOIL ANALYSISMOTOR CIRCUIT ANALYSISTEMPERATURE READINGINSPECTIONLUBRICATIONSCHEDULED REBUILDSCHEDULED REPLACEMENTROUTINE CLEANINGAMD CLEANINGAMD INSPECTIONAMD LUBRICATIONCSD VALIDATIONRUN TO FAILUREDINNER OUT OF POSITION AND OR DOES NOT TRANSFER LUG MISALIGNMENT DAILY PM INSPECTION 3 2 2 12 CBM DCHAIN STRETCH DAILY PM INSPECTION, AUTO LUBE 8 2 1 16 CBM DRAIL MISALIGNMENT DAILY PM INSPECTION 3 2 2 12 CBM DSERVO MOTOR FAILURE 1W PM INSPECTION (VISUAL) 5 4 9 180 CBM 1M 1WPHOTO EYE FAILURE (2) NONE 3 5 7 105 PM 1MDRIVE CHAIN FAILURE 1W PM INSPECTION (VISUAL) 4 2 3 24 CBM 1WDRIVE SPROCKET WORN 1W PM INSPECTION (VISUAL) 4 2 3 24 CBM 1WLUG CHAIN CONTAMINATION (PRODUCT FALLING) NONE 2 5 9 90 MODDINNER NOT IN 4 X 5 MATRIX RAIL MISALIGNMENT INFORMAL PM DAILY INSPECTION 3 2 4 24 MODBELT CONTAMINATION NONE 3 8 8 192 MODSERVO MOTOR FAILURE NONE 5 4 9 180 CM, POSSIBLE MODBELT DRIVE GEAR(2) FAILURE (ONE PLASTIC, ONE METAL) DAILY PM INSPECTION 4 2 2 16 CBM DBELT TORN OR EXCESSIVELY WORN INFORMAL PM DAILY INSPECTION 3 3 3 27 CBM DDamage Codes Cause CodesTask Codes
Rotary Filler Catalog ProfileCodeComponentDescription In feed Fill Table Out Feed Shaker Drive Unit VFD PLC1001 Rail Misalignment X X1002 Failed Bearing X X1003 Worn Gear X X X X1004 Air Leak X1005 Failed Electrical Circuit X X X1006 Failed Belt X X1007 Programming Error1008 Failed Belt X1009 Failed Chain X1010 Failed eye X XCause Code CatalogCodeComponentDescription In feed Fill Table Out Feed Shaker Drive Unit VFD PLC2001 Process Stopped X X X X X X2002 Process Slow X X X X X X2003 Process Fast X X2004 Over fill X X X X X2005 Under fill X XDamage Code CatalogRotary Filler Cause Code GroupRotary Filler Task Code GroupRotary Filler Damage Code GroupMaintenance Plan
Finding: ABC Indicator does provide adequate granularity forequipment criticalityResult: Insufficient indicators provide requisite separation of assets forprioritizing the application of corporate resourcesRecommendation: Develop a criticality business process and RACI toat least Base-10There are 36 characters available in ABC Indicator which provideconsiderable granularity but often only 3 are used….Criticality AnalysisSlide 16
Criticality Analysis• Single point failure• Impact to value stream• Impact to corporate objectives• Replacement asset value• Impact on reputation• Impact on EHS
Key Points to Take Home• SAP configuration needs to mature along with your organization• Collaboration between reliability, maintenance, and IT professionals is key• Control strategy performance indicators should depend on work order accuracy• Leverage FMEA for development of technical object catalogs as well as overallcontrol strategy• FMEA and technical object catalogs are living documents and should be updatedwhen appropriate• Criticality needs to be granular enough to support reliability analytics and backlogmanagement• Task, damage, and cause codes are linked to equipment class for ease ofreplication across the enterprise
Build or MigrateDatabaseRisk AnalysisFailure Mode andEffect AnalysisSeverity ofFailureLikelihood ofOccurrenceDetectability ofFailureRisk Ranking Control PlansReliabilityAnalysisAsset Module ofEAMContinuous ImprovementFunctionalHierarchyCriticalityAnalysisClose the Loop