Rel fmra white paper (2.8)

0 | P a g e
REL-FMRA ®
Reliability - Failure Mechanism and Risk Analysis with
Business Risk Profile & Business adapted PF-Curve.
Cronje Fourie

Cronje Fourie Failure Mechanism & Risk Analysis P a g e | 1
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS HEADINGS
Rel-FMRA® the complete process..............................................................................................................3
1) This paper’s goal. ...........................................................................................................................3
2) An entrepreneur starts a business to: ...........................................................................................3
3) make profit by (Business Plan):......................................................................................................3
4) This is achieved by..........................................................................................................................3
5) Thus, the business is healthy if and when the business plan key performance areas are satisfied. 3
6) At the production facility level, this relates to (KPA’s): .................................................................3
7) The areas of impact at the production process level are thus product availability, quality and cost
of production. ........................................................................................................................................3
8) When is enough, enough. ..............................................................................................................4
9) Maybe it is time to ask: What does the basic business plan require from the plant or facility?...5
d) Risk Appetite & Tolerance –(Acceptance)......................................................................................5
e) Risk Avoidance – (Non-Acceptance) ..............................................................................................5
f) Risk Appetite, Tolerance & Avoidance for Facility or Plant reliability ...........................................5
l) Rel-FMRA Methodology.................................................................................................................7
i) Know & Manage all the Failure Mechanisms...........................................................................10
ii) Expanding the Failure Mechanism and Risk analysis...............................................................10
vi) PdM & CBM Tasks from Failure Mechanisms..............................................................................11
11) The complete Rel-FMRA process seen from a Macro View.....................................................12
12) Rel-FMRA Process steps...........................................................................................................12
14) Failure patterns........................................................................................................................14
15) Business Adapted PF-Curve......................................................................................................14
i) Actual expected life......................................................................................................................14
ii) Failure state duration...................................................................................................................14
iii) Detection possibility.....................................................................................................................15
iv) PdM Period window.....................................................................................................................15
v) Restoration Window. ...................................................................................................................15
vi) Condition intensity.......................................................................................................................15
vii) Installation Date.......................................................................................................................15
viii) Exponential or Linear time to failure Calculation ....................................................................15
ix) Calendar or Usage Based Calculation. .........................................................................................15
x) Repair or Replacement Cost of the Component..........................................................................15
xii) An example of a Belt Conveyor drive pulley bearing life calculation ......................................17
i) The business adapted PF Calculations. ........................................................................................22

g) “No man is an island”...................................................................................................................23
i) The PF-Curve also assists us in defining the maintenance support processes............................23
16) Standards and Specifications. ..................................................................................................27
17) Skills Identification and skill level determination. ...................................................................29
18) The Placement of Rel-FMRA methodology in the Macro process for Business Reliability......29
19) Methodology Implementation Pitfall's....................................................................................30
20) Covering All Your Bases............................................................................................................30
21) Determine Your Plan of Attack ................................................................................................31
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGURES
Figure 1: Example of the Risk Matrix_________________________________________________________________6
Figure 2: Example of a typical Failure Mechanism Knife Line Attack ________________________________________8
Figure 3: Example of a typical Failure Mechanism Fluting ________________________________________________9
Figure 4: Example of a typical Failure Mechanism Classical Fatigue _______________________________________10
Figure 5: Rel-FMRA Macro Process Flow _____________________________________________________________12
Figure 6: Rel-FMRA Entry Form ____________________________________________________________________13
Figure 7: Example of the business adapted PF Curve ___________________________________________________16
Figure 8: Bearing Life Calculation generating inputs for Business adapted PF Curve __________________________17
Figure 9: Business adapted PF Curve calculates and indicates a Technical Justification Failure _________________17
Figure 10: Adapting the strategy to a stage 2 symptom replacement indicates technical justification. ___________18
Figure 11: Creating a new scenario with a better-quality bearing_________________________________________18
Figure 12: New scenario technical justification test at a stage 3 bearing failure symptom._____________________19
Figure 13: New scenario by increasing condition intensity by 2%. _________________________________________19
Figure 14: New scenario by increasing restoration window frequency by 21 days. ___________________________20
Figure 15: New scenario by adapting replacement strategy to stage 2 bearing failure symptom. _______________20
Figure 16: Calendar based calculation with the business adapted PF-Curve. ________________________________21
Figure 17: Monetary and lifetime lost calculation with the business adapted PF-Curve. _______________________21
Figure 18: Information derived from business adapted PF calculation._____________________________________22
Figure 19: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Equipment Database. ________________________________23
Figure 20: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Failure Mechanism Database. _________________________23
Figure 21: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Failure Patterns. ____________________________________24
Figure 22: Failure Patterns. _______________________________________________________________________24
Figure 23: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Failure State Duration. _______________________________24
Figure 24: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Example bearing life calculation. _______________________25
Figure 25: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Predictive techniques, Tools, Skills, etc… _________________25
Figure 26: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – PdM/CBM CMMS, Processes, Standards, Management, Skills,
etc... _________________________________________________________________________________________25
Figure 27: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – CMMS, Processes, Spare part control, etc..._______________26
Figure 28: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Corrective CMMS, Processes, Standards, Management, Skills,
etc... _________________________________________________________________________________________26
Figure 29: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Rel-FMRA/RCFA/RCA CMMS, Processes, Standards,
Management, etc... _____________________________________________________________________________27
Figure 30 Example of complete Business PF-Curve analysis with actual detection date. _______________________27
Figure 31: Tool for capturing Techniques and Standards ________________________________________________28
Figure 32: Tool for determining and capturing skills____________________________________________________29
Figure 33: Rel-FMRA placement in the Macro Process for Reliability ______________________________________29

REL-FMRA® THE COMPLETE PROCESS.
1) This paper’s goal.
a) The goal of this paper is to introduce the complete Rel-FMRA process,
that facilitates the company, plant, equipment and components
“today’s” condition assessment, theoretically projects life
expectancy and scientifically suggests life extension
programs/initiatives that increase the availability, efficiency and
reliability of the existing facilities equipment and components to
ensure safe and cost-effective operation.
2) An entrepreneur starts a business to:
3) make profit by (Business Plan):
a) producing a specific product that has a certain market value
b) selling this product to the market
c) maintaining this process by ploughing back some of the profits (Costs)
d) Maintaining a Healthy EBITA
4) This is achieved by
i) producing @ a specific market required volume, quality & SHE impact
ii) selling the product @ a volume & price that satisfies the business plan
b) maintain the business process by using some of the profit to
i) make infrastructure, equipment & staff available (Capital investment)
ii) Manufacture the product
(a) procure raw material
(b) procure energy
iii) Maintain the
(a) Infrastructure
(b) Equipment, Components, Spares & Consumables.
(c) Tools & Related Resources
(d) Staffing
5) Thus, the business is healthy if and when the business plan
key performance areas are satisfied.
a) Market demand for product (Volume sold)
b) Product selling price (Profit per unit)
6) At the production facility level, this relates to (KPA’s):
a) Product availability
b) Product quality
c) Product cost
7) The areas of impact at the production process level are thus
product availability, quality and cost of production.
a) Cost of production is impacted by
i) Cost of Raw Material
ii) Cost of equipment/infrastructure maintenance
(1) Materials
(2) Services

(3) Resources
iii) Cost of required energy
iv) Cost of Remuneration
b) Product Availability or Volume is impacted by
i) Yield or Rate of production
ii) Reliability of equipment
iii) Availability of equipment
c) Product Quality is impacted by
i) Raw Material Quality
ii) Process Control
iii) Equipment Functional efficiency
8)When is enough, enough.
a)When do we know that the business plan is
satisfied?
b)By using budgets derived from the business plan
we are able to measure the success at the end of
the financial period, a bit late is it not? Meaning we
are controlling the cost from behind, somewhat like
steering the dog by the tail.
c) To be proactively in control of the key business
performance areas we must know with a fair
amount of accuracy what is required to satisfy the
business plan and use this to build an execution
strategy.
d) First a few Statements:
i) The basic business plan as well as the equipment or component’s Life Cycle spans over
decades.
ii) Usually this life span surpasses it’s supporting functions life span, meaning the basic business
plan as well as the equipment “outlives” many systems, tools, techniques, processes, practices
& employees at the company.
iii) This implies that the basic business plan as well as the equipment or component’s reliability,
availability and cost life cycles, lives through many systems, tools, techniques, processes,
practices & employees.
iv) Optimisation programs are mainly focussed on systems, tools, techniques, processes,
practices & employees. This seems to be a never-ending effort, as the same set of STTPE’s
might typically go through three or four of these programs.
v) Continual market changes sometimes trigger changes to the status quo (systems, tools,
techniques, processes, practices & employees).
vi) Sometime the “new” employee skill level causes changes to the status quo (systems, tools,
techniques, processes, practices & employees).
vii) The effect of changes in the status quo STTP&E’s takes years to manifest in the business plan
or bottom line, either negative or positive.
e) Then a few questions
i) Due to technology advancements, the new and latest systems, tools, techniques, processes &
practices should be more effective?

ii) Do the new and latest systems, tools, techniques, processes & practices cover the complete
equipment or component’s Life Cycle span or is it just a “glimpse in time”?
iii) Are the new and latest systems, tools, techniques, processes & practices based on the inherent
design parameters and intended conditions of use of the equipment or component?
iv) Do the new and latest systems, tools, techniques, processes, practices & employees consider
the conditions or conditional changes over the equipment or component’s life cycle?
v) Do the new and latest systems, tools, techniques, processes, practices & employees
understand and address the strong points and shortcomings of the outgoing STTPE’s?
vi) Do the new and latest systems, tools, techniques, processes, practices & employees consider
what the business and equipment actually requires?
9) Maybe it is time to ask: What does the basic business plan require from the plant or facility?
i) Product availability
ii) Product quality
iii) Product cost
b) By understanding the business plan requirements and knowing how much, how often and when it
is acceptable or not, provides us with guidelines to work within when the reliability strategy or
plan is developed that ensures business plan satisfaction.
c) When considering the requirement of the equipment or
component’s yield or rate, availability, reliability and functional
efficiency, it is easier to define the negative occurrences and the effect
the occurrences will have. This is somewhat like starting with 100% and
subtracting negative occurrences. In other words, by knowing what the
possible risk incidents are that will prevent the business plan from being
implemented successfully, a strategy can be put into place to control
the risk of these incidents.
d) Risk Appetite & Tolerance –(Acceptance)
i) Risk appetite can be defined as the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to
take in order to meet their strategic objectives. Organizations will have different risk appetites
depending on their sector, culture and objectives. A range of appetites exist for different risks
and these may change over time. Risk appetite and tolerance need to be high on any board's
or organisation’s agenda and is a core consideration of an enterprise risk management
approach. While risk appetite will always mean different things to different people, a properly
communicated, appropriate risk appetite statement can actively help organizations achieve
goals and support sustainability.
e) Risk Avoidance – (Non-Acceptance)
i) Risk avoidance can be defined as the amount and type of risk that will prevent an
organization to meet their strategic objectives. These are the risks that the organisation must
diligently deal with and avoid as it has catastrophic impacts on the business, either immediate
and or long-term impacts.
f) Risk Appetite, Tolerance & Avoidance for Facility or Plant reliability
i) The Risk Appetite, Tolerance and Avoidance management approach must be an integral part
of the reliability strategy from the corporate or organisational level right down to the
production or process level.
g) Thus, we need a practical way of implementing a tool that can be used to measure and control the
company’s risk in regards to reliability. In all types of businesses, i.e. Financial, Insurance, Defence,
etc. the use of a risk matrix is employed as the tool to manage and control risks. It just seems logic
to adapt and integrate the Risk Matrix tool into the reliability strategy to enable us to manage
and control the risks threatening the reliability and cost of the manufacturing process. For this the

business risk profile tool was developed and integrated into the Failure Mechanism and Risk
Analysis methodology to enable the measurement of the Risks against the business plan.
i) The business risk profile adapted for facility reliability employs the use of vertical and
horizontal axes.
(1) The horizontal axes measuring consequence or impact of the yield or rate, availability and
functional efficiency of components, equipment and production lines.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(2) The vertical axes measure the probability or likelihood (Reliability) of the occurrence. In
the risk profile matrix, the business plan acceptance level is defined i.e. what impact at
what probability is acceptable or not.
h) We then end up with a business template or Risk Profile looking like this:
Figure 1: Example of the Risk Matrix
Minor
• Downtime up to 2 Hours
Moderate
• Downtime up to 2 Days
Critical
• Downtime Up to 26 Days
Catastrophic
• Downtime more than 26 Days
Minor
• COV of up to 2%.
Moderate
Critical
Catastrophic
• COV of more than 8%.
Minor
• Loss in Rate up to 2%.
Moderate
Critical
Catastrophic
Minor
• Up to 5000
Moderate
• Up to 25000
Critical
• Up to 125000
Catastrophic
• More than 125000

i) What do we now do with this?
i) To measure the strategy effectiveness against the business plan template or risk profile, all
the possible occurrences or failures of the components must be added to the template at the
correct risk number. The combined risk can then be calculated for the component, equipment
or business process/department. By doing this we know how the reliability strategy satisfies
the business plan.
j) To identify what incidents can possibly occur, some sort of process needs to be followed. There are
literally hundreds of these techniques or processes developed out there. Most of these processes
are ill suited to encompass the complete business plan process and still drills completely into the
technical functionality and failures of the facilities equipment and components. Thus, leaving us
with an inadequate “maintenance system” that gets dropped for the next flavour of the month
system.
k) Shown below are listed only but a few of these methodologies, tools or processes.
(1) FMEA
(2) FMECA
(3) RbM
(4) RBI
(5) RCA
(6) RCFA
(7) Reality Charting
(8) RCM – Failure modes.
(9) Fracas – Actual Occurrences (History).
(10)Rel-FMRA – Failure Mechanisms & Risk analysis - which encapsulates all the above and a
lot more.
l) Rel-FMRA Methodology
i) The one we will be working with, is the Rel-FMRA methodology, (Reliability-Failure
Mechanism and Risk Analysis). The Risk portion is the business plan template as described
before. As the first portion of the name implies we will be working with failure mechanisms. A
failure mechanism is the technical definition of a failure mode as described in RCM. Meaning
that we will cut out a lot of unnecessary work, before getting to the real issues that has to be
handled.
ii) The methodology operates from the understanding that there are only a few failure
mechanisms applicable the each component. These failure mechanisms are driven and
initiated by certain operational conditions. The effect of the failure mechanisms affecting the
function of the component is directly measured against the business plan in the business risk
matrix. Thus, all proposed reliability actions as a result of operational conditions that will
cause a failure mechanism to in turn cause a functional failure, are directly and immediately
measured against the business plan to determine Risk acceptance (appetite or tolerance) or
avoidance.
iii) Failure mechanisms cuts directly into the “way” that a component fails. The reason that the
failure mechanism causes the component to fail, is the condition initiating and driving the
failure mechanism, thus the cause of the failure. The root cause however usually lies deeper
and must be determined via a root cause analysis methodology and handled accordingly.
iv) Thus, the failure mechanism and risk analysis methodology determines the components
failure mechanism, cause or condition initiating and driving it and its risk to the business plan,
then eliminate or mitigate these risks.

10)
Figure 2: Example of a typical Failure Mechanism Knife Line Attack

11)
Figure 3: Example of a typical Failure Mechanism Fluting

12)
Figure 4: Example of a typical Failure Mechanism Classical Fatigue
i) Know & Manage all the Failure Mechanisms
(1) In fact, the complete reliability system consists of and exists when you Know & Manage
all the Failure Mechanisms and its conditions according to its business risk.
ii) Expanding the Failure Mechanism and Risk analysis.
(1) Understand in what ways (Failure Mechanisms) the component fails to fulfil its function.
(2) Know the conditions & condition intensities required to initiate and drive the Failure
Mechanism until component Failure.
(3) Know the business risk associated with the components Failure Mechanisms and
Conditions.

(4) Manage the business risk with the application of STTP’s i.e. Rel-FMRA, PDM techniques,
Tasks, Spares, Skill Management, Contingency plans, etc...
(5) Measure the effectiveness of the above within the business and task KPA’s by
implementing ONLY APPLICABLE KPI’s.
(6) On any Process or Engineering change apply all the previous steps.
iii) By looking at the above definition, it is clear that this methodology is the best suited for the
development of the condition monitoring and predictive maintenance strategies, as the
conditions initiating and driving the failure mechanisms are already determined, in depth
analysed and condition intensities determined. Thus, setting up the condition monitoring
technique comes directly out of this analysis instead of the widely used “shotgun” approaches.
iv) To set-up the predictive maintenance strategy, the existence of a failure mechanism is
determined and the progress is measured to determine the risk, a certain strategic business
reliability decision is made according to its impact on the business. The failure mechanism is
then tracked and trended at a calculated frequency with the use of pre-determined predictive
maintenance measurement techniques.
v) The same is true for condition based maintenance, in that after the failure mechanism is
identified, the condition initiating and driving it is determined & its risk identified, it is defined
in the reliability strategy. The condition is then tracked and trended at a calculated frequency
with the use of pre-determined predictive maintenance measurement techniques.
vi) PdM & CBM Tasks from Failure Mechanisms
(1) The following hierarchy explains how the PdM – Predictive Maintenance or CBM –
Condition Based Maintenance task, is derived from the Failure Mechanism.
(2) Equipment
(a) Component
(i) Applicable Failure Mechanism
1. PdM – Predictive Maintenance is looking for the presence and the progress of
the Failure Mechanism by using Predictive techniques, to initiate a proper
planned, component repair or replacement task well in advance.
a. All forms of NDT, Vibration Analysis (Failure Symptoms), MCE/A, Infra-
Red Inspection, Oil Analysis (Particle Diagnosis), etc...
(ii) Applicable Condition
1. CBM – Condition Based Maintenance is looking for the conditions that will
initiate and drive the Failure Mechanisms until a Functional Failure of the
component, to initiate a proper planned, repair or replacement task to
mitigate the condition, well in advance.
a. SPM, Peak View, Oil Condition Analysis (Cleanliness, Viscosity), Inspection,
etc...

13) The complete Rel-FMRA process seen from a Macro View.
Select Component
Select Failure
Mechanism
Define actual
conditions initiating
and driving the
Failure Mechanism
Map Failure
Mechanism to
Business Risk
Profile
Decision to
eliminateFailure
mechanism
Decision to
eliminateCondition
Decision to mitigate
Condition
Decision to mitigate
businessimpact
Assess
Possible
solutions via
business
adapted PF
Curve
Until both tests
are acceptable
Implement
Business Decision
Test
Economical
Feasibility
Test Technical
Justification
Modification
Modification Precision
Pro-active
Condition
Based
Maintenance
Predictive
Maintenance
Contingency
Plans
Spare Parts.
Figure 5: Rel-FMRA Macro Process Flow
14) Rel-FMRA Process steps.
a) Develop the Business Plan Templates or Risk Profiles.
b) Select Equipment to analyse.
c) Break up equipment into the smallest functional components.
d) Determine Failure Mechanisms applicable to the Components.
e) Determine the Conditions that is required and present and that initiates and drives the failure
mechanisms.
f) Measure against Business Plan Templates or Risk Profiles (Determining the economic feasibility).
g) Perform the Analysis to determine the Action to eliminate the Failure mechanism.
h) Perform the Analysis to determine the Action to eliminate the condition.
i) Perform the Analysis to determine the Action to mitigate the condition (Pro-Active Maintenance).
j) Perform the Analysis to determine the Action to mitigate the impact on the business.
k) Measure against the business adapted PF Curve (Determining the technical justification).
l) Run as many as needed What If scenarios to ensure the chosen strategy is sound.
m) Measure the chosen strategy against the business risk profile.
n) Use actual condition measurements and failure data to feed back into the Rel-FMRA system, to
test the soundness of the original reliability business decisions and to optimise component
performance.

The Rel-FMRA Form:
Figure 6: Rel-FMRA Entry Form
15) What is a PF Curve and now a business adapted PF Curve?
a) Potential to Failure Curve, Probability of Failure Curve, and many more names!
b) It basically depicts the component life until failure, indicating the condition on the left-hand or y
axes and time or usage on the bottom or x axes. The incipient or onset of the failure and the
possible failure detection by applying different techniques is pointed out in time. The effectiveness
of the different techniques will determine the pre-warning time that the failure is about to occur.
It is clear that the PF-Curve is used in conjunction with PdM-Predictive Maintenance as we are
working with failure inception points and time to failure. Up to now, that is about what the PF
curve was used for. There are many variations of the PF-Curve in all kinds of literature in
circulation. However, all of these are merely used as graphical display examples for abstract
explanations.

16) Failure patterns
a) Firstly, it is necessary to understand failure patterns.
b)
17) Business Adapted PF-Curve
a) The business adapted PF-Curve or for that matter any PF-Curve can only be applied to Failures
with a pattern of B (Wear Out) and C (Fatigue). For failures with patterns A, D, E and F only the
Risk Profile is used to measure the proposed or implemented maintenance strategy effectiveness.
b) For the Rel-FMRA methodology, the PF-Curve was adapted to be an inter-active forecasting
projection tool that is used to measure the technical justification of recommended actions during
the Rel-FMRA methodology process, using inputs from the business process.
c) For projections to be calculated by the business adapted PF-Curve the following inputs are
required:
i) Actual expected life.
(a) The Actual expected life is usually separately obtained either from the OEM’s life
calculation, calculated by yourself or historical data. The program will then calculate
the “normalised” expected life taking the input from the condition intensity,
exponential selection and usage or calendar based calculation into account to project
the expected life. The “normalised” expected life of a component is affected by the
design, manufacturing, procurement, installation and the condition intensity applied
to the component during the operation and applied maintenance. All these applied
conditions and interventions accelerate or decelerate the failure mechanism rate.
ii) Failure state duration.
(a) The failure state duration as in the case with the expected life is usually separately
obtained either from the OEM’s failure state duration calculation, calculated by
yourself or historical data. The program will then calculate the “normalised” failure
state duration taking the input from the condition intensity, exponential selection and
• Failure Pattern A is known as the Bathtub curve and has a high probability of
failure when the equipment is new, followed by a low level of random failures,
and followed by a sharp increase in failures at the end of its life. This pattern
accounts for approximately 4% of failures.
• Failure Pattern B is known as the wear out curve and consists of a low level of
random failures, followed by a sharp increase in failures at the end of its life.
The pattern accounts for approximately 2% of failures.
• Failure Pattern C is known as the fatigue curve and is characterized by a
gradually increasing level of failures over the course of the equipment’s life.
This pattern accounts for approximately 5% of failures.
• Failure Pattern D is known as the initial break in curve and starts off with a
very low level of failure followed by a sharp rise to a constant level. This
pattern accounts for approximately 7% of failures.
• Failure Pattern E is known as the random pattern and is a consistent level of
random failures over the life of the equipment with no pronounced increases or
decreased related to the life of the equipment. This pattern accounts for
approximately 11% of failures.
• Failure Pattern F is known as the infant mortality curve and shows a high initial
failure rate followed by a random level of failures. This pattern accounts for
68% of failures.

usage or calendar based calculation into account to project the expected failure state
duration. The “normalised” failure state duration of a component is affected by the
design, manufacturing, procurement, installation and the condition intensity applied
to the component during the operation and applied maintenance. All these applied
conditions and interventions accelerate or decelerate the failure mechanism rate.
iii) Detection possibility.
(i) The detection possibility percentage of the failure mechanism or the condition
initiating and driving the failure mechanism, is dependent on the chosen
techniques, implemented technologies efficiency, detection possibility calculations
and available technique symptom diagnosing skills.
(ii) The actual possible detection period or projected date will again be “normalised”
to the best or closest possible PdM intervention window by the program.
iv) PdM Period window
(a) The PdM period is mainly time or usage based and is entered in weeks. The program
will generate a time series with these values, of which it will use the best or closest
possible detection window and date.
v) Restoration Window.
(a) The Restoration Window as in the case of the PdM window is mainly time or usage
based and is entered in weeks. The program will generate a time series with these
values that it will use the best or closest possible restoration window and date for
component or equipment restoration.
vi) Condition intensity
(a) In a normal installed operational state, the condition intensity is set to 100%. During
the monitoring phase and if or when a symptom is detected the condition intensity is
adjusted and used to determine the actual condition intensity and the remaining life
of the component. The condition intensity value is also extensively used during the
“what if” scenario calculations.
vii) Installation Date
(a) As it says, it is the date that the equipment was installed. For the program to
calculate estimated or expected dates for the incipient, initiation of the failure
mechanism, the possible detection date, the expected repair date and the expected
end of life date, the installation date must be provided.
viii)Exponential or Linear time to failure Calculation
(a) Indicates whether the program calculates the failure mechanism progression as linear
or exponential.
ix) Calendar or Usage Based Calculation.
(a) Indicates whether the program should do a usage or calendar based calculation.
x) Repair or Replacement Cost of the Component
(a) For the program to calculate cost or loss in revenue due to a component failure, the
complete repair or replacement cost must be provided.

Figure 7: Example of the business adapted PF Curve
xi) To summarise - Business Adapted (Technical Justification) PF Curve
(1) The actual CBM or PdM periods or frequency of interventions are defined and depicted
and is used in the Technical Justification calculation.
(2) Theoretical or Historical Expected life and failure detection probability is taken into
account but is then “normalised” or moved by the program to the applicable CBM or PdM
window.
(3) The actual corrective maintenance windows are defined and depicted and is used in the
Technical Justification calculation. The applicable corrective maintenance window is
selected (normalised) by the program to test the justification of the suggested remedial
action.
(4) Spare Part lead times are taken into account.
(5) The forecasted runtime of the equipment is taken into account and adjusts the expected
life and normalised failure state duration, PdM or CBM periods as well as the corrective
maintenance windows according to calendar or usage based time.
(6) The program uses exponential or linear calculations, depends on which is selected.
(7) The program calculates forecasted dates for expected failure date, failure incipient date,
possible detection date and first corrective repair date.

xii) An example of a Belt Conveyor drive pulley bearing life calculation
xiii)
Figure 8: Bearing Life Calculation generating inputs for Business adapted PF Curve
(1) Although the bearing life calculation indicates an available useful life of 22.63 weeks
(almost 5,5 months) at a stage 3 failure, the business adapted PF calculation shows that
the failure mechanism Adhesive and Abrasive Wear with the prevailing conditions will
cause a break-in task or breakdown on the equipment. Thus, running the bearing until a
stage 3 bearing symptom arises, is not technically justified and this will cause a much
more expensive and inferior quality corrective task as well as possible production loss.
Figure 9: Business adapted PF Curve calculates and indicates a Technical Justification Failure
(2) The same scenario with the Stage 2 symptom as replacement point selected. The
corrective task can now be planned, scheduled in the planned maintenance window with

all Quality inspections and Quality inspection points with enough time to perform a high-
quality corrective task.
Figure 10: Adapting the strategy to a stage 2 symptom replacement indicates technical justification.
(3) By using a better-quality bearing, the total bearing life increased from 8 to 17 years and
the business adapted PF calculation shows that the bearing can be replaced within a
scheduled maintenance window. The failure state duration increased from 181 weeks to
372 weeks. However, this leaves only seven weeks for replacement before failure with the
current conditional parameters.
Figure 11: Creating a new scenario with a better-quality bearing

Figure 12: New scenario technical justification test at a stage 3 bearing failure symptom.
(4) The PF curve indicates that we are cutting it a bit too close for comfort. To test this, we
increase the condition intensity to determine how much it will take to push the chosen
strategy over the edge. As can be seen on the next calculation it takes a mere 2% increase
in the condition intensity to prove that the technical justification failed.
Figure 13: New scenario by increasing condition intensity by 2%.
(5) In the next scenario, the scheduled maintenance window was moved 21 days ahead in
time. This is a very likely scenario as we are working on the complete plant reliability, and
the scheduled maintenance windows depends on the supplied processes major schedule
period that might now be extended due to better reliability. The calculation also indicates
that the technical justification failed.

Figure 14: New scenario by increasing restoration window frequency by 21 days.
(6) Thus, by installing the better-quality bearing, using the same conditional parameters and
replacing the bearing after a stage 2 symptom has been identified the total bearing life
increases by 46.6%, the bearing will be replaced 56 weeks before failure under controlled
conditions, ensuring a high-quality task. This shows the advantage of using the what-if
scenarios in the business adapted PF calculation utility.
Figure 15: New scenario by adapting replacement strategy to stage 2 bearing failure symptom.
(7) All the calculations up to now was done on a time or usage base. The program has the
ability to perform these calculations according to the business calendar, meaning taking
the actual utilisation of the component into account and then performing the calculations
to provide actual estimated dates. The same scenario with a utilisation of 62.3% shows

that the bearing should last 28.75 years. Thus, if installed as stated on 2004/02/05, its
estimated end of life will be 2032/09/30 and the estimated Failure Mechanism detection
date will be 2030/02/14.
Figure 16: Calendar based calculation with the business adapted PF-Curve.
If, whilst performing PdM (Predictive Maintenance) the Failure Mechanism symptom is
detected and verified, the actual detection date is entered. For argument sake 2017/09/12.
The business adapted PF-Curve will calculate the remainder life, lifetime lost and the
monetary loss due to early failure. As the monetary loss comes of the company’s bottom line
and is visible to the reliability personnel, it will trigger a RCA/RCFA with a FMRA analysis to
extend the component life to the intended or theoretical life.
Figure 17: Monetary and lifetime lost calculation with the business adapted PF-Curve.

d) The business adapted PF curve gives us the ability to run as many as needed what-if scenarios, to
as far as possible ensure equipment reliability, by testing the technical justification of as many as
possible prescribed actions, derived during the analysis.
e) One point is clear, we will only see the full benefit of using this method, using the previous
example, after some time on the company’s bottom line as profit.
f) Thus, quick jerky changes & wrong decisions only show up negatively only after years on the
company’s bottom line. To “turn it around” will take even longer.
i) The business adapted PF Calculations.
(1) The business adapted PF utility calculates quite a few useful parameters as can be seen in
the image below.
(a) Failure state duration – As already explained the failure state duration is affected by
the condition intensity applied to the component that is accelerating or decelerating
the failure mechanism rate.
(b) Condition Intensity –The condition intensity that is applied to the component, that is
accelerating or decelerating the failure mechanism rate, this will shorten the
equipment life as well as the normalised failure state duration applicable for this
calculation.
(c) Normalised Failure State Duration – Adapted due to condition Intensity or Forecasted
Runtime to show the expected failure state duration.
(d) Detection Weeks before failure – Normalised by the program to the applicable PdM
period from the theoretical value.
(e) Repair weeks before failure - Normalised by the program to the applicable or next
available Maintenance Window.
(f) Works order Planning & Scheduling – The time period available for the planning and
scheduling process to be completed. Spare part lead time is taken into account.
(g) Technique Detection possibility – The technique type and Failure state progression
detection possibility given in percentage.
(h) Maintenance Window Frequency – The periods for the shutdowns or standard
corrective maintenance stop periods. The program will select the applicable
Maintenance Window.
(i) PdM Window Frequency – The periods defined for the CBM or PdM execution
frequencies. The program will select the applicable CBM or PdM Window.
(j) If the installed date is entered all the other approximate dates are calculated.
(k) If the actual detection date is entered, all parameters are recalculated.
(l) Costs or Profit Loss is calculated due to early failure.
Figure 18: Information derived from business adapted PF calculation.

g) “No man is an island”
h) Or for this methodology to be successful in satisfying the basic business plan, no STTP&E stand
independent. There are numerous STTP&E’s required to support it to enable and ensure success. In
other words, this must be the way in which we perform our day to day business, it must become
second nature or the way we think.
i) The PF-Curve also assists us in defining the maintenance support processes.
j) This is achieved by the “assumptions” made during the business adapted PF calculation and
analysis process. An example is when you decide on a technique that is to be applied, to
technically justify the suggested remedial action, it is assumed that the technique is available on
or off site, the specific scenario is known by the technician using the technique, the instruments
are suited for the specific conditions, etc. Following is an explanation of how this works.
Figure 19: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Equipment Database.
k) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:
i) All equipment is identified by a unique number.
ii) Equipment list is available in a Data table or Database.
iii) All equipment is linked to a production process.
iv) All equipment is prioritised by means of a criticality allocation in accordance its role in the
production process.
Figure 20: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Failure Mechanism Database.
l) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:
i) A standard set of fully prescribed, facility applicable Failure Mechanisms, exists in a Data
Table or Database.
ii) All conditions initiating and driving the failure mechanisms are defined in the Database.

iii) Influencing factors and prevention actions are defined for the failure mechanisms in the
Database.
iv) Failure Mechanisms and its conditions are understood by the analysis team.
Figure 21: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Failure Patterns.
Figure 22: Failure Patterns.
m) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:
i) Failure patterns are defined for use with the calculation.
ii) The Business adapted PF-Curve can only be used on the Wear-Out and
fatigue failure patterns.
Figure 23: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Failure State Duration.
n) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:
i) The complete or expected life of the component is known (Calculated, Estimated, Historic
data).
ii) The Failure State Duration is known (Calculated, Estimated, Historic). The failure state
duration is the time from failure inception, the time the failure starts until the time the failure
causes a functional failure.
iii) Example of a Bearing

Figure 24: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Example bearing life calculation.
Figure 25: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Predictive techniques, Tools, Skills, etc…
o) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:
i) A database of site applicable predictive techniques exists and is maintained.
ii) The correct & calibrated predictive maintenance tools are available on or off site.
iii) The technicians are trained and experienced in the use of the predictive maintenance tools.
These are own or service technicians.
(1) Tool operation.
(2) Measurement techniques.
(3) Data Analysis.
(4) Condition prognosis.
Figure 26: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – PdM/CBM CMMS, Processes, Standards, Management, Skills, etc...
p) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:

i) A Computerised Maintenance Management System exists that will trigger a predictive
maintenance task that is to be performed, either time or usage based.
ii) All applicable methods, test and work procedures, parameters, instructions & information is
supplied with the predictive maintenance task.
iii) A system and process exist that enables the monitoring and management of the of the task
throughout its life cycle.
iv) A system and process exists for the predictive maintenance technician to initiate a corrective
task with detailed descriptions and priorities.
Figure 27: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – CMMS, Processes, Spare part control, etc...
q) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:
i) Spare part lead times are known and is as accurate as possible.
ii) A CMMS is implemented and maintained that allows for:
(1) Notification of a required task
(2) Prioritisation of the task
(3) Critical spares can be identified
Figure 28: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Corrective CMMS, Processes, Standards, Management, Skills, etc...
r) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:
i) A CMMS and process is implemented and maintained that allows for:
(1) Detailed planning of the task.
(2) Scheduling of the task.
(3) Task is triggered.
(4) Monitoring of the task.

(5) Completion of the task.
(6) Feedback from the task is captured.
ii) Corrective teams have the skill and the ability to apply the skill to ensure the task is completed
successfully.
iii) Corrective teams follow the plan on the works order.
Figure 29: Business adapted PF Curve Assumptions – Rel-FMRA/RCFA/RCA CMMS, Processes, Standards, Management, etc...
s) The Business Adapted PF calculation System “assumes” that:
i) A Rel-FMRA, RCFA and RCA system exists and is triggered on a functional failure occurrence.
ii) An Action Logs exists that monitors the allocated tasks.
iii) A formal MOC (Management of Change) process exists.
iv) CMMS is updated with the feedback data.
Figure 30 Example of complete Business PF-Curve analysis with actual detection date.
t) An example of a complete Business adapted PF-Curve with an actual PdM detection date
provided, with the applicable Failure Mechanisms, implemented Predictive and Condition Based
Routines details and Spares with stock keeping policy, lead times, cost, etc.
18) Standards and Specifications.

a) Whilst performing the Failure Mechanism and Risk Analysis, maintenance techniques will be
developed, chosen and standards will be created for each of the Techniques and Standards &
Specifications will be developed for each technique.
Figure 31: Tool for capturing Techniques and Standards

19) Skills Identification and skill level determination.
a) For each of the maintenance techniques a master skill requirement with the supporting skill
requirements will be defined.
b) The required skill level to perform the technique will also be defined for each of the required skills.
c) The skills must be cascaded down to Department, Section and Individual levels. Tasks, whether
PdM, CBM or corrective tasks, must not be allocated to personnel not skilled to perform it. This
will foil the exercise and benefits will not be reached.
Figure 32: Tool for determining and capturing skills
20) The Placement of Rel-FMRA methodology in the Macro process for Business Reliability
Figure 33: Rel-FMRA placement in the Macro Process for Reliability

Rel fmra white paper (2.8)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (6)

Similar to Rel fmra white paper (2.8)

Similar to Rel fmra white paper (2.8) (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Rel fmra white paper (2.8)