Archive | Predictive Maintenance

2191

7:06 pm
November 4, 2014
Print Friendly

Preventing Impending Equipment Failure Earlier

solutionspotAdvanced-pattern-recognition technology adds a powerful predictive component to your reliability toolbox.

By Jane Alexander, Managing Editor

Improving reliability metrics has long been among the top priorities of plants and other physical asset-intensive organizations. Plant managers, engineers and technicians continually work to ensure that equipment will efficiently operate for as long as safely possible.

Proper maintenance plays a significant role in asset performance and reliability. Plants today incorporate a combination of maintenance techniques to obtain the best return from each asset. Adding a predictive component to a comprehensive strategy can uncover issues that other maintenance techniques may not achieve on their own, leading to even greater reliability improvements. According to InStep Software (InStep), its PRiSM predictive asset analytics tool is that type of component.

PRiSM uses advanced pattern-recognition (APR) to derive predictions from empirical models generated by “learning” from an asset’s unique operating history during all ambient and process conditions. The model effectively becomes the baseline to determine the normal operational profile for a piece of equipment. While modeling can be a complicated task, PRiSM is designed to simplify and streamline the process, allowing models to be created in minutes, rather than days or weeks.

By comparing an asset’s unique operational profile with real-time operating data, PRiSM can detect subtle changes in system behavior that are often the early warning signs of impending equipment failure. Engineers and operators are alerted well before the deviating variables reach standard alarm levels, creating more time for analysis and planning any corrective action. Once an issue has been identified, the software can provide root cause analysis and fault diagnostics to help the plant engineer understand the source of the issue and how to proactively address the problem. Diagnostic technology lessens the likelihood that abnormal operating conditions will be attributed to the wrong variable.

PRiSM doesn’t require special or additional sensors. Instead, the software relies on existing machinery sensor data, both historical and real-time (historical data typically resides in the plant historian), for input into the modeling and predictive process. It works with all types of equipment and equipment manufacturers.

1115f5-1

Sample PRiSM actual vs. predictive model

Providing actionable insight

InStep notes that in addition to helping enhance equipment reliability, PRiSM provides a range of other benefits. Unscheduled downtime can be reduced because plant operators receive early warning notifications of incipient issues, thus avoiding potential asset failures. Rather than having to shut the plant down immediately, engineers can assess a problematic situation and possibly schedule maintenance for a more convenient time. Maintenance costs are then reduced due to better planning; parts can be ordered and shipped without rush and equipment can continue running.

Some suggested maintenance windows can be lengthened as determined by equipment condition and performance. The use of predictive analytics software also gives plants the ability to identify underperforming assets, increase asset utilization and extend equipment life. Other benefits are realized when considering the costs that “could have been,” including replacement equipment, lost productivity, additional man hours, etc., when a major failure is avoided. With this actionable information, plants can achieve increased equipment reliability, availability, capacity and performance.

Generating real-world payback

PRiSM’s performance in real-world plant situations is well documented. In one example, soon after implementing the software in its operations, a large nuclear power-generation company identified a significant fault. PRiSM determined that oil temperatures of a condensate-pump-motor bearing weren’t within the normal range defined by the multi-dimensional model. The cause was an improperly assembled coupling that was seizing and approaching mechanical failure. If the issue had gone undetected, the coupling problem would have resulted in damage to both the motor and the pump—and an associated replacement time of four to six weeks. Replacement cost, expediting fees and craft overtime was estimated at $700,000, with the probability of this failure estimated at 0.70 or $490,000.

In another instance, a large North American electric power company was able to avoid a potentially disastrous failure because of an early warning notification provided by PRiSM. Site personnel were alerted of a vibration step change on a steam turbine that had been previously operating normally. Plant personnel verified that a proximity probe and casing vibration had both changed. Further analysis indicated a likely loss of mass in the turbine blade path. The utility immediately suspected shroud material had been lost, based on the unit’s history. It was determined that the unit could continue to run at a reduced output, under increased observation, until a more convenient and strategic time to bring it off-line. Once it was brought off-line, a borescope inspection verified missing shroud material and several other segments that were close to liberating.

Had this issue not been identified through APR vibration modeling, it could have caused immediate unplanned downtime, loss of generation, possible catastrophic failure and danger to personnel. The change was not significant enough to alert the operations staff of this impending condition via normal monitoring practices. It was determined that use of PRiSM and PdM protocols was the reason for this positive outcome, which resulted in a potential savings of millions of dollars in lost revenue and increased repair costs, in addition to maintaining the safety of the operating engineers. MT

UPDATE: Schneider Electric to Acquire InStep Software

Schneider Electric (Schneider-Electric.com/us) recently announced that it has entered into an agreement to acquire Chicago, IL-based InStep Software (instepsoftware.com), the provider of PRiSM and other real-time performance-management and predictive asset-analytics software and solutions.

According to the two companies, InStep’s eDNA, PRiSM and EBS software offerings will be core to Schneider Electric’s future strategy in data management, predictive asset analytics and energy management. The acquisition strengthens Schneider Electric’s reputation as an industry game changer and fits within the company’s strategy of improving and expanding its product offerings for the global power and energy market.

“InStep expands our capabilities and presence within the power and energy management markets, particularly in the area of information management, which includes process history, reporting and analysis,” said Rob McGreevy, Vice President of Information, Operations and Asset Management for Schneider Electric. “InStep provides additional capabilities in predictive analytics as well. Today, much of the analytics business is within the power industry and pertains to assets, but we expect that to expand to other industries. Another benefit, of course, is that through InStep, we’re adding an excellent management team and some highly experienced employees to our software team, which will certainly help us created additional value for our customers.”

InStep’s PRiSM software, specifically, is expected to help Schneider Electric fulfill strategic plans around Big Data, the Internet of Things and other emerging trends. Appropriate future integration between PRiSM and Schneider Electric’s suite of Avantis products is also envisioned.

3389

12:56 pm
November 4, 2014
Print Friendly

The Reliability-Driven Maintenance Organization

Getting there requires taking a close look at weaknesses and taking measurable steps to correct them. Here, a respected industry expert shares tips on how to become a high-performing operation.

By Christer Idhammar

Any plant maintenance department wants to be known as a cost-effective organization. For our purposes, “cost effective” means maintenance without waste: where waste is the gap between how good the organization is and how good it can become. Waste includes poor safety, losses in quality and high costs.

In a poorly performing maintenance organization, the gap between the real and the ideal world tends to increase over time because it reacts to problems instead of preventing them. As a result, there isn’t time to take measures that will break this reactive work cycle. Even in periods when equipment is operating well and no panic-work comes up, the maintenance organization tends to slow down and wait for the next problem. This creates a culture where maintenance personnel think it is useless to start other work because they will be interrupted with real, or often perceived, urgent work. So even between reactive work, maintenance personnel accomplish very little.

From an operations standpoint, this situation can be comforting because it means maintenance can deal with equipment problems on short notice. It is far easier for operations to call maintenance to fix a problem when it occurs than to write a work request to correct an anticipated problem. This type of relationship typically occurs when operations does not feel responsible for the cost of maintenance. Even if most work is requested by operations, the maintenance manager is in the hot seat if budgets are overrun.

A high-performing maintenance organization is far different. It is founded on anticipating what will happen in the future and planning and scheduling corrective actions in advance. It is not only DO-oriented, it is THINK-oriented. It is an organization that continuously designs out problems and improves.

  • Correcting attitudes and cultures
  • To develop a high-performing maintenance organization, the first steps are:
  • To fully understand how good the organization is currently, and locate the gaps where improvement can occur
  • To develop and commit to an action plan to close the gaps, including clearly defined roles and responsibilities
  • To change work attitudes and culture.

In some plants, the typical first step toward improving maintenance performance is to purchase a new computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) or instruments for predictive maintenance. They may also implement fragmented improvement initiatives using Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM), 5S or similar tools. And while these are good tools, they often fail because they are implemented before an organization does the basics well or changes the work culture to support their efficient use.

Bill Gates addressed succinctly the potential value of technology-based tools when he said, “The first rule of any technology used in a business is that automation applied to an efficient, well-defined operation will magnify the efficiency. The second is that automation applied to an inefficient or poorly defined operation will magnify the inefficiency.”

Measuring results

To measure the results of maintenance activities, plants traditionally view good maintenance in terms of low costs. With few exceptions, this cost is always considered too high. This view of maintenance stems from an old attitude, which is that maintenance only costs money and does not contribute to productivity.

Plants must change the way they measure maintenance results. Analysis of production advancements over the past 35 years reveals that many process industries have more than tripled their production output. During this time, the number of operators has decreased about 30%, while the number of maintenance crafts people has decreased about 6%. This growth in productivity can be traced to increased automation and more reliable equipment—and it’s not necessarily a result of efficient maintenance.

A common way plant maintenance departments measure their effectiveness is to compare maintenance costs with other plants. This is the wrong thing to do, because those who are not the top performer in the comparison will waste time explaining why the figures are wrong instead of focusing on how to improve. We also know that different accounting principles can make a difference of up to 100% in what is considered a maintenance cost, capital investment or operations expense.

The focus must instead be on learning about activities, technology and processes that drive reliability, safety and cost. Better planning and scheduling of maintenance work correlates directly to high manufacturing reliability, better safety and lower costs. It is also important to understand that predictive maintenance alone does not prevent anything. It only gives information on failures that are developing toward a breakdown. But with this information, plants can “anticipate” the future and plan and schedule corrective maintenance actions.

In the best case, plants can schedule the corrective action to be executed in a maintenance “window.” This is an opportunity that presents itself when equipment is down for reasons other than planned and scheduled maintenance, such as changing belts, unscheduled shutdowns, cleaning and other tasks. The link between predictive maintenance and planning and scheduling of work is an essential basic reliability and maintenance process. Executed with precision, it will increase quality product throughput, improve safety and reduce costs.

Performance indicators*

The right thing to do is benchmark the maintenance department and measure continuous improvement internally. If comparing with other organizations, plants should learn what processes best performers use to drive improved reliability and maintenance costs, and how they execute them well.

To continuously improve execution of essential processes, it’s necessary implement performance indicators as close to the action as possible. This will motivate and trigger actions that will influence the overall performance.

In a reactive organization, break-in work must be reduced. During transition to an organization in control, planning and scheduling quality can be an indicator. Trends in backlog, overtime and contractor hours can also be meaningful indicators when the organization is starting to gain control. When an organization gains control over its maintenance strategies, it becomes important to measure Root Cause Implementations completed and problems eliminated. To do this properly, clear definitions on what’s measured are necessary.

In a study of 38 process lines, the only strong correlation between low and high performers is how well they planned and scheduled maintenance and operations work. All machines that planned and scheduled more than 50% of work had measured Reliability (as % Quality x % Time, with Time based on 8760 hours available per year) of over 85%. Top performers that planned and scheduled between 75% and 90% of all work achieved a Reliability of 92–96%.

Work measurements

Plants that use hands-on tools or other types of work measurements as a way to determine maintenance efficiency are doing the wrong thing. Here’s why:

  • They do not promote cooperation between management and crafts people.
  • They do not consider those who may be busy doing the right thing. For example, in the work-measurement system, thinking time and trouble-shooting time is considered hand-off-tools and, thus, non-productive.
  • Almost all time identified as non-productive by work measurement is typically attributed to a lack of work management and planning and/or scheduling. In fact, it is a result of poor management.
  • When equipment is operating, it is not always true that maintenance people who are busy with hands-on tools are productive. In fact, they can be busy doing the wrong things or only pretending to be busy.
  • In a scheduled shutdown, it is true that people are more productive if they can work on planned and scheduled work without interruptions. Again, only good planning and scheduling—good management—can accomplish this.

Partnering in reliability

To achieve results-oriented reliability and maintenance, plants must realize that production is a partnership between operations, maintenance, stores and engineering. The traditional view is that maintenance is a service organization; operations is the internal customer of maintenance; stores support maintenance; and engineering is an isolated “happy island.” The right thing to do is to view these sectors as partners in a joint venture to reliably produce quality products.

In this partnership, maintenance will deliver equipment reliability; operations will deliver production process reliability; stores will continue to support maintenance; and engineering will support both maintenance and operations, as well as practice life-cycle costs (LCC) or asset management in its design, specification and selection procedures for new equipment. This means that equipment selection will be based on the cost to buy and cost to own. The concept includes reliability and maintainability analyses.

Recognition is important

Most maintenance organizations can verify that they receive recognition when they fix a major breakdown, but seldom hear anything when they prevent a breakdown. While there is nothing wrong with recognizing good work in a breakdown situation, if this is the only time maintenance people are recognized, it sends the wrong message. This type of recognition fosters a culture of maintenance heroes or “Maintenance Tarzans.” They become action-oriented, which can make it difficult for them to transition to more planned, scheduled and organized maintenance work.

Overtime compensation can motivate, especially considering that breakdowns are about 74% more likely to occur when the full crew is off site. However, this is changing as the Y-generation enters the job market—a group that values time off more than higher pay. Plants need to remember that poor maintenance is visible and good maintenance is invisible, because it is less action-oriented. It is always right for plants to recognize implemented improvements, failure avoidance, planning and scheduling performance and overall reliability.

Performance-improving tips

The following strategies can help develop a high-performing organization:

Work management and planning & scheduling: Most frontline supervisors schedule work to the people they have available. The right thing to do is schedule work that must be done, prioritize it based on risk and what is best for the business, then schedule people to execute this work.

Time estimates are almost always based on four or eight-hour time segments. In many cases, no fewer than two people are assigned to each job. This provides the supervisor a buffer of resources he or she can use for jobs added to the schedule on short notice. In this setup, scheduling-compliance can wrongly appear to be high. Therefore, it’s better to schedule work with real time estimates and include problem solving, or thinking time, as part of all work done by crafts people.

In a high-performing maintenance organization, 20% of all effort hours should be used on problem elimination or continuous improvement that will “design out maintenance problems.”

Anticipation: Most plants have morning meetings to discuss what happened the previous day and night, and what is planned for the current day. High- performing maintenance organizations will spend most of this meeting on what will happen tomorrow and next week. Though it sounds unrealistic, this can be done because very few problems occur and little time needs to be spent on yesterday’s problems. The focus should be on future activities.

Following the same principle, the organization should work on a monthly or weekly forecast and finalize the next day’s schedule about four hours before the end of each day. The schedule should be communicated to crafts people before they leave for the day so they can prepare for the next day’s work.

Flexibility: The 12- to 14-person craft-line-oriented maintenance organization is, or must soon be, a thing of the past. Craft lines should not limit work flexibility—only work skills to do a job safely should be a constraint. This will often require changes in union agreements and a focused training program for crafts people. Experience indicates that if management presents a clear plan, it will be well received.

Lost-production analyses: These types of analyses often reflect lost production only by department. Such a procedure does not build a partnership between departments, nor does it solve problems.

The better approach is to define, solve and classify a problem by department, equipment and type of failure after analyses are complete, then follow up on how to solve the problem in the future.

Storeroom closure: Many maintenance organizations waste up to 30% percent of their time walking to the store(s) and searching for parts. Plants should plan and schedule maintenance activities so stores can prepare and deliver parts where and when they are needed. This will require a Bill Of Material (BOM) populated to 95%+ accuracy.

Technical documentation: All technical and economic information about equipment should be readily available. The equipment, loop or circuit number should be the key to this information. At a minimum, all parts kept in stores, or not kept in stores, should be tied to equipment identification in the BOMs. The lack of good and reliable documentation is one of the reasons why most maintenance planners do not have time to plan.

Maintenance shift coverage: Most three-shift plants have maintenance resources on the late shifts. Some have a maintenance supervisor on each shift. Ideally, a plant should operate without maintenance people on the night or evening shift. This is possible only if maintenance believes the plant can operate 16 hours without major maintenance problems. If this is not possible, the plant should do something about it.

The above issues are select examples of actions and cultures that will promote high-performing maintenance. It is important that a plant maintenance organization seriously examine how good it truly is, determine if it is promoting the right things and if improvements are needed. Only then can a maintenance organization proceed to make the changes needed to become as good as it can be. MT

Christer Idhammar is the Founder of IDCON, Inc. (idcon.com).

3040

8:29 pm
July 8, 2014
Print Friendly

Two New Industrial Infrared Cameras Feature Wireless Connectivity and Easy Viewing


Screen Shot 2014-07-08 at 3.19.16 PMFluke Corporation has expanded the Fluke Connect system with its new Ti90 and Ti95 Infrared Cameras featuring wireless connectivity. According to the company, the Ti90 and Ti95 deliver best-in-class image quality with up to 84% better spatial resolution (of handheld industrial infrared cameras priced $1000- $2000), thus allowing technicians to conduct infrared inspections from a safer distance without compromising accuracy. Their 3.5-inch color LCD screens are up to 32% larger than competitive models and offer adjustable brightness for easy viewing in most conditions.

These new cameras come with an extensive SD memory system, including a removable 8 Gb SD memory card or 8 Gb wireless SD Card. This feature allows technicians who share cameras to simply swap SD cards at the end of their shifts instead of needing to download images onto their PC before turning the camera over to the next technician.

AutoBlend and Picture-in-Picture modes are available in the included SmartView reporting software that lets technicians easily perform analyses and image adjustments/enhancements.

About Fluke Connect
The Fluke Connect system allows maintenance technicians to wirelessly transmit measurement data from their test tools to their smart phones for secure storage on the cloud and universal team access from the field. More than 20 Fluke tools connect wirelessly with the app, including digital multimeters, infrared cameras, insulation testers, process meters and specific voltage, current and temperature models.

Fluke Connect ShareLive video call allows technicians to collaborate with others, letting them see the same images and measurements, and get approvals for repairs without leaving the field.

The Fluke Connect app can be downloaded for free from the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store.

2265

11:00 pm
July 1, 2014
Print Friendly

The 2013 NAME Award Winner: Redefining Excellence at Emergent BioSolutions

0714f1-1

The Lansing, MI-based maker of the anthrax vaccine BioThrax tells how careful refinements of its already sophisticated maintenance operation brought them the coveted win.


By Rick Carter, Executive Editor

References to “customer service” are frequent at the Lansing, MI, campus of Emergent BioSolutions (EBS), Inc., winner of the 2013 NAME (North American Maintenance Excellence) Award. Maintenance and facilities services team members mention it often when discussing how they serve their many internal customers in operations, production and research. Some 400 employees work at this site, which is a portion of the Biodefense division of publicly held EBS, headquartered in Rockville, MD. Most of these employees depend on the maintenance and facilities team to ensure the site’s complex operations run smoothly. Importantly, EBS/Lansing also pursues a seemingly high-risk business strategy where good customer service takes on elevated value: The division has only one primary external customer—the U.S. government—for whom it makes only one product: BioThrax, an injectable vaccine that protects against anthrax disease (see sidebar). It also happens that BioThrax is the only such anthrax vaccine licensed by the FDA, making it—and its manufacturing operation—unique in the world.

Master plan

EBS Lansing’s 12.5-acre campus in a semi-rural area northwest of Michigan’s capital city is situated on the state’s former Department of Public Health site. It still includes buildings that date from the 1930s when the state itself produced vaccines for residents through the Michigan Biologic Products Institute (MBPI). EBS bought MBPI through a public auction in 1998 (under its then-name BioPort Corporation) and has since introduced many updates inside the now-fenced-and razor-wired perimeter. These include new buildings, expanded manufacturing space (completed and in the process of qualification) and, most important, a plan to capitalize on a situation whereby every drop of product the plant makes is virtually guaranteed to be purchased.

“With the [state] facility came the people, the process, the equipment and all the intellectual property,” says Dino Muzzin, Vice President, Engineering, Facilities & Supply Chain. “The main product at that time was and still is BioThrax, the only FDA-licensed anthrax vaccine. That was the number-one asset that was interesting to BioPort at the time.”

The Lansing facility now produces up to 9 million half-milliliter liquid doses of BioThrax per year, all of which are purchased by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and distributed to locations around the country for inclusion in the Strategic National Stockpile of medical countermeasures. To meet its commitment to the government, the company follows a somewhat circuitous manufacturing and distribution procedure. Newly made product is held on-site in large vessels until a desired quantity is reached. The vessels are then shipped off-site, where the vaccine is transferred to individual 10-dose (0.5 ml.) vials, which are then returned to Lansing for visual inspection, labeling, QA and pick-up by HHS. “We don’t know where the final product goes,” says Muzzin. He does know it’s used to fulfill the U.S. government stockpile goal of 75 million doses. BioThrax is indicated for the active immunization of adults who are at high risk of exposure to anthrax. A four-year shelf life means that a certain portion of product is regularly expiring and in need of replacement.

With such enormous demands on a biopharmaceutical manufacturing procedure that cannot be rushed, an ongoing goal at EBS Lansing is to expand product output through other means. “When I started 10 years ago,” says Muzzin, “we made around 2 to 3 million doses per year.” A key reason output is now almost five times that amount “is our maintenance and facilities team,” he says. “When I joined, our systems were not reliable or dependable. The time and energy and the systems this crew has put into this operation have helped ensure that we have a reliable infrastructure. We’ve taken our deviations down very low, to the point where we’re a well-oiled machine. It wasn’t always like that.”

0714f1-2

A process and purification vessel, used in the second step of BioThrax manufacturing.

A look in the mirror

Muzzin’s distinction contrasts the NAME-award-winning facility of today with one that, due to the nature of the product, was always a good operation but had room to improve. This was made clear in 2006 when the Lansing site first applied for the NAME, but was not considered for contention.

“We really thought we could win it that time,” says Barry Quinn, Specialist, Facilities Services, and point-person for both the 2006 and 2013 entries. “But this is when we found that the real value of the NAME Award is the application. Going through it is a learning process. It asks so many questions you should be asking anyway, but nobody has thought to write down.”

Because of stringent FDA operating requirements, obvious maintenance strengths at the site included its PM program. “The FDA requires that if your equipment is not PM’d on schedule, you shut down production; it has to be tagged out,” says Steve Iadicola, General Maintenance Manager (Electrical/HVAC/Building Controls). “So for our critical equipment, the PMs are 100% and they always will be or else we shut down. Even back in 2006, the PMs were strong.”

Also, the fact that the company routinely operated with a high level of oversight meant that its systems and operations underwent various iterations and refinements over the years. These were and continue to be driven by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, lean manufacturing and other continuous-improvement initiatives, and additional government oversight. “We go through numerous audits throughout the year from the FDA, CDC, USDA and others,” says Mike Vitello, Senior Manager, Facilities Services. “So we’re used to answering questions and going in front of panels.”

Nonetheless, some of EBS’ pre-award maintenance and manufacturing environment will sound familiar. “This was previously a very top-down organization,” says Iadicola. “It was pretty much, ‘You do this because this is how it’s written.’” Jack Zimmer, General Maintenance Manager (General Construction), agrees that “we pigeon-holed our talent.” Plumbers worked only on pipe work, he says, and steamfitters were only assigned steam-related work.

Other areas that fell short of world-class were planning & scheduling and internal communications, both of which were focus areas for the 2013 win. But Quinn says the main reason EBS missed a NAME win in 2006 was the lack of buy-in from all phases of the Lansing operation. “A maintenance professional can’t answer that entire questionnaire,” he says. “But for the 2013 submission, the reporting structure was different, so direction came from a vice president who was in charge of every person who needed to participate and we did very well getting buy-in.”

Barry Quinn and Mike Vitello with the coveted NAME Award.

Barry Quinn and Mike Vitello with the coveted NAME Award.

New job descriptions

The learning curve that EBS followed in 2006 and eventually led to the 2013 NAME win featured several key strategy implementations. “Since 2006, we’ve looked more formally at reliability and predictive maintenance to get ahead,” says Iadicola. “That’s where you see what was the nearly 2% equipment loss [downtime] rate drop to less than 1% first, and is now trending at less than one-half percent. It’s because we’re thinking ahead of the equipment, and we are thinking more aggressively about pairing maintenance work with normal operation breaks to try not to have an extra gap in the production schedule.”

This was accomplished in part through the team’s efforts to replace the silo approach to job responsibilities with new levels of empowerment and cross-training. “Our carpenters now do backflow preventer maintenance, and have gone to school for their certification,” says Zimmer. “And we have steamfitters who are doing plumbing.”

Jobs are also viewed more holistically, says Iadicola, an example of which is how work is performed on the operation’s autoclaves (high-pressure-steam-based sterilizers). “There are multiple things we can do at one time on these units,” he says. “We might pair up an electrician who has controls background with a steam mechanic who understands the operation of the unit. This way, instead of the technician thinking he’s only maintaining a component on this equipment, it’s clear to him that he’s maintaining all of this equipment. And there is great efficiency in having both people working on it in real time as opposed to one person doing his work, then handing it off to another.”

A change in job descriptions—with a focus on detailed, system-specific information—also helped. “We wrote specific tasks with regard to how our system functions,” says Ben Ehnis, Manager, Facilities Resource Planning. “This allowed us to create a repeatable process. And once your process is repeatable you can build flow through it and use it to make additional enhancements.” The written, detailed descriptions aided both new workers and those who filled in for absent workers. “This is where the cross-training really comes together and starts to close gaps,” says Ehnis. “But [the descriptions] are a living document,” he adds. “Any one of us can redline something and bring it back to the group for consensus.”

Iadicola praises the effort for “dipping deeper into the quality level” of EBS maintenance and facilities team members and, in the process, raising the bar for expectations. “We’re tapping into their talents,” he says. “We still have the quality requirements, but our technicians are stepping up and not only improving their skills but understanding our business better and what’s important. In the sixyears I’ve been here, the operator and technician input at this greater level is at the core of the changes we’ve made, and we’re stronger because of it.”

Tighter planning and scheduling

With cross-training and job descriptions continually expanding, the group could tighten its approach to planning and scheduling. The traditional view that planners should have a certain amount of backlog and plan a week or more in advance “is a good practice where it fits,” says Ehnis. “But on a site like this where we sell out everything we make and have maximum operational capacity running at all times—and any squandered time is a squandered opportunity—we learned that this process didn’t fit our [internal] customers’ expectations.” The uniqueness of the Lansing manufacturing process, adds Iadicola, means special issues “will always arise. Everything here is custom or a standard piece of equipment that we use in a custom way.”

To better support the production efforts that are “very focused on product throughput,” says Ehnis, “we knocked our planning and scheduling window down from a week or more to three days”—a significant time reduction that caught the eye of the 2013 NAME auditors. It was accomplished with the help of the flexibility they could tap regarding technicians’ abilities, as well as the improvements they made to communication channels. An important factor is that while the Lansing site produces only a single product, its 12-acre campus houses numerous operations—manufacturing and related operations, product formulation and storage, research laboratories, filled-vial quality assurance, shipping and office functions—in service to this product. Coupled with the omnipresent FDA oversight, the mix poses a significant challenge to site-wide maintenance coordination.

“Manufacturing is our number-one customer,” says Ehnis, “but we have three buildings that perform some type of manufacturing at any given time, and we have other buildings that support those activities. We meet with the teams from those three manufacturing buildings every week to talk about the requests they have and to work those schedules out.”

Ehnis emphasizes that the meetings are two-way, with each side giving and getting. “They are not held with the idea that we’re here to do what anybody asks. We have very candid discussions. As much as we’re ready to admit we have room to improve, we will provide feedback, too. We’ll tell them what the data shows and that they need to do XYZ to help us keep this equipment functional. As a site, we have embarked on an accountability initiative to have more direct, focused feedback. This builds credibility with operators and other customers. When you’re partnering with them, you’ve earned their trust and are able to get candid feedback, especially when you can show through data that this is not just perception. It’s more about ‘How can we help?’ or ‘How can we change this procedure?’”

As for the reduced work window, Ehnis says the three-day format has not only improved customer expectations, it has reduced stress on his planners. “They’re not having to touch the same thing two or three times and schedule something a week or two in advance when we know something is going to change,” he says. “That was a win for both sides.” Similarly, he says, the team’s internal customers “don’t have to wait a week or two to get something lined up that’s important. The planners love it because it’s that much quicker for the cycle time to get something of high importance on the schedule, accomplish it and move on.”

Today, Ehnis’ team works weekly with production planning to blend routine maintenance and calibration activities with requests from production or support for a continuous-improvement project. “Those are the things we needed to respond to more realistically” he says, “and it allowed us to customize our model. So even though [what we do] doesn’t necessarily align with industry best practices from a textbook or training seminar, our biggest takeaway in getting this award is that you can’t be afraid to study the data you’re getting and take it in the direction that’s right for your organization. You have to know your organization well enough to understand what the needs are and focus on meeting those needs, then address the next issues that come up. That’s how you’re going to achieve operational excellence.”

Alignment

Shaping a maintenance program to match an operation’s specific needs doesn’t happen overnight. It can be especially taxing when dealing with old equipment, which the Lansing team has done for some time.

“We’re talking about 30-year-old equipment,” says Mark Bartlett, Production Support Supervisor, Facilities Services. “Bioreactors [which generate the biologically active vaccine], holding tanks, the pipe racks themselves, pumps, HVAC systems that cool the jackets, it’s all integrated,” he says, and all subject to review and requalification when changes are made. But the team has long understood that maintenance of EBS’ critical equipment is preferred over outright replacement, the approval and recertification process for which is measured in years.

Bartlett faced the aging-equipment issue recently when he received a call from a vendor that supports the company’s fermentors (where essential microorganisms are grown). He was told the units were too old to receive further support. “So we had a ‘Save the Fermentors’ project where we identified all the parts we needed to buy and keep in stock.”

Ehnis says parts issues like this and others are “where some of our continuous-improvement initiatives come in. If Mark’s team identifies something going bad that we can’t find, and we’ve had these issues, then we get innovative in our solution. We’ll pull in the cross-functional team and say, ‘Here’s what we had, here’s what we think we need.’ You get buy-in and approval, go out and find what you need, bring that in, then go through a commissioning qualification and ultimate implementation and stock that for the future.” It’s not always that easy, recalls Bartlett, but the approach has worked.

A necessary aspect of old-equipment upkeep is having ample spares on hand, and EBS’ multi-million-dollar spare-parts inventory is no exception. “The NAME auditors questioned it,” says Bartlett, so he reminded them not only of the need for the parts, but of their cost. “They’re phenomenally expensive,” he says, “because many are specialty parts made of 316 Grade stainless or silicone or another costly material that’s required because it involves product contact. Basically everything we buy is five times more expensive than what you would pay for any other piece of equipment in normal manufacturing.”

The next milestone

The new EBS Lansing manufacturing building currently undergoing scale-up procedures will potentially triple the company’s Biothrax output. It will also relieve some of the pressure to maintain the site’s aging equipment. Still, the facilities and maintenance team members recognize that their ability to not only successfully maintain this site’s older equipment, but allow it to boost output has sharpened their skills—another demonstrable fact that impressed NAME auditors.

“The NAME auditors didn’t believe some of the things we told them,” says Vitello. “They asked if we really scheduled so tightly and if we had shutdowns going to 15-minute intervals on certain tasks, and they challenged this.” But when the auditors saw it for themselves, they were swayed. They were also impressed by the site’s embrace of a 5S program Bartlett introduced at EBS when he arrived in 2011. A recognized 5S subject-matter expert, Bartlett “created the system and a core team that monitors it and keeps feedback,” he says. Begun in maintenance, it has spread through production, the laboratories and now into the offices. Bartlett says he looks forward to when it will be totally absorbed by the EBS culture because “it’s the only system that is made to become obsolete.”

Asked what might come next for a NAME winner, the Lansing team is unanimous in its belief that the award is only one of many milestones they can achieve. “The first thing I thought after we got the award was, how do we stay at this level?” Vitello recalls. “We are working to keep that high level of performance by continuing to do what we’ve identified as factors for success and constantly finding ways to further improve.”

Ehnis and others see Lansing emerging as one of the top industry manufacturing facilities, especially when the new manufacturing capacity goes on line and allows the facility to take on new product lines. “I think we already are” at the top, says Ehnis, but acknowledges the value of sharing what the company has learned from the NAME win with other company sectors. “We’re very aware of our role as the sole provider to the U.S. government of the only FDA-licensed anthrax vaccine. But the way you make yourself be the truly indispensible site is to be better than everybody else.”

NAME point person Barry Quinn likely speaks for the entire Lansing team when he says his post-award plan is “to do everything I can to make sure we keep this site productive.” He also admits to having a selfish reason. “This is a great place to work,” he says, “and I want to continue working right here. I hope someday my son will, too.” MT

Anthrax vs. BioThrax

Anthrax is an infectious, usually fatal disease caused by the bacterium Bacillus anthracis, which occurs naturally in soil throughout the world. Infection occurs when the spores enter the body through a cut, abrasion or open sore or by ingestion or inhalation. Once inside the body, anthrax spores germinate into bacteria that then multiply and secrete non-toxic proteins that can become lethal if allowed to combine within the cells of the exposed human or animal.

Inhalational anthrax is the most lethal form of anthrax. Anthrax spores are small (2-6 microns in diameter) and easily aerosolized, which makes this the most likely form to be used in an anthrax bioterrorism attack. In the post-9/11 world, anthrax has gained notoriety in the U.S. and around the world. It was in the news last month when up to 86 workers were believed to have been accidentally exposed to it at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, GA. News stories indicated that the workers were given antibiotics. They may also have been inoculated with BioThrax, the anthrax vaccine produced by Emergent BioSolutions (EBS) at its Lansing, MI, campus. No infections at CDC were reported.

BioThrax is the only FDA-licensed anthrax vaccine, and is indicated for the active immunization of disease caused by Bacillus anthracis in persons aged 18 through 65 whose occupation or other activities place them at high risk of exposure. According to EBS, BioThrax is undergoing tests that may also make it valuable for post-exposure use. The vaccine is stockpiled by the U.S. government, and is routinely administered to members of the U.S. military deployed to high-threat areas.

For more information, visit biothrax.com.

3665

4:07 pm
June 5, 2014
Print Friendly

All-in-One Condition-Monitoring Solution for Rotating and Reciprocating Equipment

According to Machine Saver, its patent-pending VTB product offers operations an all-in-one/one-size-fits-all condition-monitoring solution for rotating and reciprocating equipment. Designed to monitor ball bearings, roller bearings and gear conditions, this recently introduced digital triaxial accelerometer and temperature sensor can interface with a DCS, PLC or SCADA, or function as a standalone machine-protection monitor.

Screen Shot 2014-06-05 at 10.12.53 AMThe VTB provides overall vibration level outputs for the X, Y and Z axis in Acceleration, Velocity, Displacement, and temperature and impact severity levels for mechanical looseness. When used with CBM Vision software, it can take user-defined periodic snapshots of dynamic vibration information for real-time automated condition analysis, thus helping to eliminate traditional vibration-data-collection routes.

 

2189

4:55 pm
June 3, 2014
Print Friendly

Honeywell Launches New Range of SmartLine Temperature Transmitters

060314 SmartLine_Temp_Modularity sm

Honeywell Process Solutions has launched a new range of SmartLine industrial temperature transmitters aimed at improving overall plant and personnel efficiency, even in harsh, noisy process environments. Part of the company’s SmartLine field-instrument portfolio, these products incorporate a number of efficiency-enhancing features, including advanced displays capable of showing process data in graphical formats and communicating messages from the control room.

According to the manufacturer, whether they measure temperature or pressure, all of its SmartLine transmitters feature modular components that simplify field repairs and reduce required repair-parts inventories.

With the intuitive diagnostics of both transmitter and sensor, information is available on the transmitter display to provide a real-time view of the sensor health. Built-in dual-input and digital output options minimize the number of instruments needed for monitoring and switching needs.

Honeywell’s Smart Connection Suite control-system integration delivers transmitter messaging, maintenance-mode indication and tamper alerts that improve field time to repair and control-room communication and help avoid unit trips.

 

970

3:21 pm
May 28, 2014
Print Friendly

Vibration Monitoring: More Affordable Options, But Analysis Makes it Work

Vibration monitoring is finding wider use through the growing range of smart, affordable mobile devices, but accurate analysis remains a key factor for success.

rick_carter_thumbBy Rick Carter, Executive Editor

See or hear a piece of rotating equipment vibrate abnormally, and the solution is obvious: shut it down, find the cause and fix it. In the pre-electronic era, this is all there was to vibration detection—just what human eyes and ears could detect.

When electronic sensors arrived, plant personnel could routinely monitor equipment vibrations and get a valuable perspective of potential failure trends before oddities became evident on the equipment. Now, wireless is expanding in-plant and remote-site opportunities for vibration monitoring, but brings a level of complexity its condition-monitoring cousins like infrared and ultrasound do not.

“The acquisition of vibration data is pretty much done the same as we’ve always done it,” says Trent Phillips, Condition Monitoring Manager at Ludeca, Inc., in Doral, FL, “but the data transmission aspect is more tricky. Transmission of process-related data over a distance usually requires short bursts of simple numbers and can be done very fast. With vibration monitoring, if you limit your data transmission to just overall values, it’s similar to temperature data: simple numbers. To do real vibration monitoring and analysis, you have to transmit the spectrum and the waveform. In that respect, we’re talking thousands of numbers that must be transmitted for every sample taken. Those numbers have to be transmitted error-free, so from that perspective, it gets more complicated.”

And as more equipment—both more types and in more locations—is monitored remotely for vibration, more benchmark data is needed. So is the specific background of each piece of equipment, according to Phillips. “In Europe, more than in the U.S., they rely on ISO values to determine what’s an alarm and what’s not,” he says. And while standards can be helpful, Phillips says he has “found that you have to let the machine tell you based on its own rate of change. That’s where you’ll really learn about the severity of a situation.” Machines are like people, he adds, noting that “one may be able to vibrate at a high level, which is normal for that machine. The machine next to it, however, may fail if the vibration reaches only 20% of that level. So you have to look at all machines differently, and you have to look for the rate of increase and how it is trending. That’s how a good analyst will determine severity of a problem.”

More ‘feet on the street’

Phillips and others note that while wireless opens the doors to more vibration monitoring, mobile units, in turn, expand the ranks of personnel available to obtain the data. “Everyone wants to become more mobile,” says Scott Brady, the Applications, Training and Documentation Manager for SKF USA’s Condition Monitoring Center in San Diego, CA. “This is the same trend we had moving from desktops to laptops to make the office worker more mobile. Now we’re looking at how to make the plant worker mobile, so we have people who didn’t necessarily take vibration readings [before]. We have more ‘feet on the street,’ you might say. It’s no longer just up to the vibration guy.” Operators and others in close proximity to the machines can now gather that data with wireless mobile devices. “We’re making it easier to get that data,” he says, “and as the age-wave hits, as well as for companies who are trying to save money and not hire when some retire, they can still be gathering this information.”

The lower price points of most mobile units remove yet one more barrier to bringing this technology into the plant. “A lot of these techniques have not been adopted in the past because of the high cost of the equipment and the training,” says John Bernet, Mechanical Application Specialist at Fluke Corp., in Everett, WA. “The trend today, which has been coming a long time, is to find a way to make proactive maintenance like vibration testing, thermography and others more attractive to the smaller and mid-sized companies.” The mobile tools Fluke and others offer are not only “less expensive than some that have been on the market for the last 30 years,” says Bernet, “they’re easier to use,” an important factor when placing the tools in less-experienced hands. And because many handheld vibration testers come pre-programmed to analyze vibration spectra, “training can also be short,” says Bernet. “Within a few hours they can be using it, and that information can be linked wirelessly over the Internet. It’s much easier to sign off on.”

Phillips adds that with non-maintenance personnel doing more monitoring, “the analyst will have more time to do machine assessments, which is where the real savings come in. This is when you find out what’s causing things to fail, you drive out the failure modes and you truly become more reliable.”

Keep your analyst happy

Getting there, of course, still hinges on an analyst’s ability to understand and interpret accumulated data. Phillips says there’s no substitute for experience, education and getting certified in the field. “It also takes a certain personality trait,” he says. “They have to be very proficient and detail-focused, and be passionate about what they do because—and this is true if you’re using any of the condition-monitoring technologies—most analysts will tell you they get rejected a lot. Management is looking to understand why, and they’ll usually come back to the vibration analyst and say, ‘Why didn’t you tell us?’ So you have to have your documentation to be able to show that you did tell them.”

But even this process is undergoing simplification. “Our customers are looking more for red/yellow/greens and go/no-go indications,” says Phillips. “They want the equipment to give them that sort of traffic light. I would argue the technology for this is still not quite there, but it’s much closer.”

SKF’s Brady points to the growing use of systems that “will send you an e-mail alert to your phone if you have a moderate outer-race bearing defect or if you have a severe misalignment problem” as examples of the trend toward simplification. “Today, this information comes from the office computer,” he adds, “but I see this moving closer and closer to the person out near the machine. This could be wireless or it could be intelligence embedded in the machines themselves.”

In five or 10 years, predicts Bernet, “We’ll have even more smaller and faster tools, and eventually each machine will have its own sensor. We’ll still need walkaround tools,” he says, “but its going to be more localized. So you’ll have wireless sensors all over a plant, and you’re going to have that information going to smartphones and the cloud, and 80% is going to be done at the machine instead of in an office. Think of your car,” he adds. “It has vibration sensors all over it, so why can’t we put those vibration and temperature sensors on other types of rotating machinery? Because it has been so hard to get to a lot of machinery, we’ve been limiting ourselves to the top 5% or 10% of the machines that are the most production-critical. As we start using smart tools,” he says, “we can encompass 80% of the plant, maybe even 90% or more.”

2667

7:34 pm
May 26, 2014
Print Friendly

Wireless Machine Condition Sensor for Hazardous Duty

New Machine-Condition-Sensor

SKF (www.skf.com) has launched a new Wireless Machine Condition Sensor that leverages WirelessHART protocol to deliver dynamic vibration and temperature data for condition monitoring and diagnostics. The product has ATEX Zone 0 certification, which means it is appropriate for use in hazardous environments like those found in petrochemical and oil and gas operations, among others. The product combines both sensor and router node into one compact and battery-operated unit the size of a typical industrial accelerometer.

According to SKF, these sensors communicate with each other and with a wireless gateway, thus creating a mesh network that’s well suited for monitoring rotating machinery across large sites, in hard-to-reach locations or where traditional WiFi communications won’t work. Capabilities include relaying data from one node to another and back to the gateway, and receiving automated commands from SKF-supplied Wireless Sensor Device Manager software.

If a node is unable to receive signals directly from the WirelessHART gateway, it sends and receives them through a nearby node that can pass the data to and from the gateway. The WirelessHART gateway communicates with the Device Manager software and automatically exports collected data into SKF @ptitude Analyst, a diagnostic and analytic software tool that helps plant personnel determine a course of action.

Because SKF’s Wireless Machine Condition Sensors run in a low-power-consumption mode, the manufacturer says their batteries can last for years in the field.

 

Navigation