Dear all,

how to understand predictive maintenance in TS2 7.5.1? what's the difference with preventive maintenance? and the most important is how to implement it?

Thank you very much
steven

An old post for starters:

Posted by Roger Eastin on Monday, 27 October 1997, at 5:16 p.m., in response to Predictive maintenance methods, posted by Felix cruz on Tuesday, 21 October 1997, at 3:06 p.m.

Predictive maintenance methods mentioned in the QS9 standard are identified by the type of equipment you are operating. If you have machinery that uses items such as gear boxes, then you should consider having vibration analysis done on them (if they are considered key manufacturing equipment). Here the analysis would detect gear wear or possible fractures of the gears. If you have equipment that uses control boards which contain electronic circuits, then you need to look at IR testing of the circuits. This analysis would detect "hot spots" on the circuit which may mean that a component is beginning to break down. If the equipment you are running uses lubricating fluids such as oil, then you would look at using a lab to do fluid analysis. Here you would look for oil breakdown or contamination levels. If your equipment uses perishable tooling such as drill or milling bits, you would set up a program to measure tool wear to anticipate failure. For the first three methods, outside companies can do this. You could probably do this last one. (You could even track MTBF of these parts in order to improve wear by using different vendors, different coatings of bits,etc.)

Dear all,

how to understand predictive maintenance in TS2 7.5.1? what's the difference with preventive maintenance? and the most important is how to implement it?

Thank you very much
steven

Steven,

"Predictive" seems, to me, another term for "Preventive". If you have a Preventive Maintenance "Process", I wouldn't sweat it. Another standard making its presence known by changing the accepted terminolgy? :bonk:

Steven,

"Predictive" seems, to me, another term for "Preventive". If you have a Preventive Maintenance "Process", I wouldn't sweat it. Another standard making its presence known by changing the accepted terminolgy? :bonk:

At the risk of spouting gobbledygook (sp?) here is my take on it.

Predictive maintenance is indeed preventive maintenance, but all preventive maintenance is not predictive. In other words, predictive uses data gathered from the equipment (wear, vibration, etc.) to optimize the interval between instances of a specific maintenance task.

For instance: Why shut down right now to do prev. maint., when predict. maintenance (data gathered) tells us we can go another 100 hours?

Or: It does not matter what the manual says, the oil analysis tells us that the main bearings are toast, and if we don't shut down now, we will be replacing more than bearings... (wham!!! chunka chunka).

JMO

Craig

At the risk of spouting gobbledygook (sp?) here is my take on it.

Predictive maintenance is indeed preventive maintenance, but all preventive maintenance is not predictive. In other words, predictive uses data gathered from the equipment (wear, vibration, etc.) to optimize the interval between instances of a specific maintenance task.

For instance: Why shut down right now to do prev. maint., when predict. maintenance (data gathered) tells us we can go another 100 hours?

Or: It does not matter what the manual says, the oil analysis tells us that the main bearings are toast, and if we don't shut down now, we will be replacing more than bearings... (wham!!! chunka chunka).

JMO

Craig

I've had companies that have used MTBF and other measures as part of their predictive maintenance program. Does this fit in as well in your definition Craig?

I've had companies that have used MTBF and other measures as part of their predictive maintenance program. Does this fit in as well in your definition Craig?


Without a doubt...

For instance: Why shut down right now to do prev. maint., when predict. maintenance (data gathered) tells us we can go another 100 hours?

Craig

Let's take my car as an example. The manufacturer requires that I change the oil every 3K miles. Should I analyze the oil and based on the results, extend the intervals an extra 1 or 2 K miles? Do I know more than the equipment manufacturer? And, do I spend big bucks on analysis vs. following the Manufacturer's recommendations. I don't know. If the Customer requires it, charge them more per unit? :vfunny:

Let's take my car as an example. The manufacturer requires that I change the oil every 3K miles. Should I analyze the oil and based on the results, extend the intervals an extra 1 or 2 K miles? Do I know more than the equipment manufacturer? And, do I spend big bucks on analysis vs. following the Manufacturer's recommendations. I don't know. If the Customer requires it, charge them more per unit? :vfunny:

My thinking:

If you change your oil, based on the manufacturer's requirements, then it would be preventive

If you change your oil, based on the analsis of the oil then it would be predictive.

The question is should we really worry about the difference?

For the example of the oil change, no don't worry about it. However, when looking at high speed bearings, older equipment (i.e. stamping presses) the oil sampling is a great idea. The OEM may state that a main bearing should last 2000 hrs of operation. If I know that I operate at the high end of the operating envelope (over tonnage, faster cycles, etc.) I want to have my hydraulic oil sampled. It may alert me to other issues as well, oil contamination, heat, etc.
OEM recommendations are based on testing an field feedback under "normal" operating conditions. Depending on some of the other factors, age, operation environment, etc. the need for other means of "predicting" maintenance may be necessary.

For the example of the oil change, no don't worry about it. However, when looking at high speed bearings, older equipment (i.e. stamping presses) the oil sampling is a great idea. The OEM may state that a main bearing should last 2000 hrs of operation. If I know that I operate at the high end of the operating envelope (over tonnage, faster cycles, etc.) I want to have my hydraulic oil sampled. It may alert me to other issues as well, oil contamination, heat, etc.
OEM recommendations are based on testing an field feedback under "normal" operating conditions. Depending on some of the other factors, age, operation environment, etc. the need for other means of "predicting" maintenance may be necessary.

I guess if I'm using the equipment at the edge of its operating parameters, I can expect earlier failures. I would be looking for alternative equipment that can operate the way I want it to without "pushing the envelope. But I understand the idea behind it and if I can do that, then Stevenli certainly can! :vfunny:

I know, but sometimes it's easier to run at max instead of buying a new press or mill. Duct tape and pop rivets can only go so far. :vfunny:

Let's take my car as an example. The manufacturer requires that I change the oil every 3K miles. Should I analyze the oil and based on the results, extend the intervals an extra 1 or 2 K miles? Do I know more than the equipment manufacturer? And, do I spend big bucks on analysis vs. following the Manufacturer's recommendations. I don't know. If the Customer requires it, charge them more per unit? :vfunny:


energy:

OK, we'll take your car. Please.

A 1972 Dodge Dart? A new engine used to run about $800 (back when I blew my slant 6 up). It costs about $50 - 75 per analysis for the oil check. Does it make sense? Not really.

But, what if my vehicle is one of these dump trucks we have around here, that operate in dusty conditions, and require a large crane to remove the Cat diesel? $75 bucks suddenly does not sound so bad. Do we know more than the manufacturer? Sure, we know how the truck is used, and we have all this data, see, generated under the conditions OUR truck sees day in and day out.

And, when the analysis shows a high concentration of the metal the main bearings are made of, it's time to remove it from service.

Before the fireworks and the "rapid unintentional disassembly".

So, how's the Dart running, anyway?

Craig :vfunny:

energy:

OK, we'll take your car. Please.

So, how's the Dart running, anyway?

Craig :

The reference to the car was only to demonstrate that there are manufacturers guidelines and then these "mandatory" looking for the $$ boogey man things. The environment, working conditions are things you should have done before you purchased this equipment. If you try to stuff 1 lb of gator tails in a lb bag, in your lap is where it belongs.
Oh, by the way, I have your Dart right here! :p

Craig H. hit the nail on the head, I'll try to drive it through the wood.
7.5.1.4 "..continually improve the effectiveness and the efficiency of production equipment."
Let's say your welding line robots are driven by hydraulic pumps. Each pump costs US$2000, a manufacturer's recommended rebuild costs US$100 each, the rebuild frequency is 1 year given your usage. You have 200 pumps. You have 4 maintenance men. You could go broke paying for all that scheduled (preventive) maintenance, while your plant is shut down for 3 weeks/year to do it, or when the line shuts down in the middle of production even though you rebuilt that pump 2 months ago. Or you could determine, through oil analysis, vibration analysis, etc., exactly what a pump looks like as it runs from brand new to failure. Then, you regularly analyze your pumps and "predict" time to failure, based on the trend data, and schedule pump rebuilds only when necessary (plus know that one is about to go out in the middle of production on Thursday).

There are companies making fortunes selling equipment to do this, and saving their customers money, I used to work for one.

I think this is the TS motto: "if you are not improving your effectiveness enough to save the customer some money, you're not doing it right."

Craig H. hit the nail on the head, I'll try to drive it through the wood.


Ouch! Excellent point made. Wanna buy a Dart? ;)

Craig H. hit the nail on the head, I'll try to drive it through the wood.



Perhaps it was a roofing nail? :vfunny:

The reference to the car was only to demonstrate that there are manufacturers guidelines and then these "mandatory" looking for the $$ boogey man things. The environment, working conditions are things you should have done before you purchased this equipment. If you try to stuff 1 lb of gator tails in a lb bag, in your lap is where it belongs.
Oh, by the way, I have your Dart right here! :p

Energy:

Sure, we can describe the conditions to the manufacturer. So, they say we need the "stupor dooper" dust package. Or, the Conn. winter cold weather package. We get that on the vehicle. There is still no way to know how much wear and tear the vehicle will see until we gather data describing our experience. At that point we know more about how the equipment performs in OUR environment/usage than the designer/engineer/manufacturer that made the jalopy.

Does it make sense to do so for the Dart? Well, if it is a rare, numbers matching ('68 I believe) 426 Hemi Dart, it might be. For the dump truck, which cost several times more than even that expensive rare car, it makes lots of sense.

As far as gator tails go, is that before or after they are removed from the reptile?

How did my Dart get all the way up there from GA? Oh, well, its had almost 2 decades. Does it still have the dent in the fender?

:biglaugh: :p

Craig

Okay, everyone who has had a Dart in their lives, raise their hand. :bigwave:

Ouch! Excellent point made. Wanna buy a Dart? ;)
Not if it's the dart you told Craig you had right here. Praise from the sheriff, though! I feel compelled to add at the risk of remaining quiet and preserving my reputation.

Many companies write excessive maintenance schedules in order to sell more rebuild parts ($$$) and/or better their MTBFs at your expense. Others tell you to change your oil every 7,000 miles so that they can sell you a new car sooner. As QA folks do we trust this stuff or collect and analyze the data ourselves. A wise, old, former mil-std, mentor once told me "In God We Trust, All Others Bring Data."
-ICY

My thinking:

If you change your oil, based on the manufacturer's requirements, then it would be preventive

If you change your oil, based on the analsis of the oil then it would be predictive.

The question is should we really worry about the difference?
I agree with your example.

Has Predictive not been carried over as a TS requirement from QS-9000?

Okay, everyone who has had a Dart in their lives, raise their hand. :bigwave:


Ok, I'll fess up. 1 1972 Dodge Dart 4 dr. Brown. Bought circa 1982 for $600. Slant 6 225. Lasted 3 years, until I had to do the Fred Flinstone (out the door) manuver instead of sliding shifter in R. My "friends" thought it was hilarious.

1 1971 Plymouth Duster (Dart's kin), bought around 1980, for $800. Slant 6 225. Not very powerful, but just the ticket for really learning how to drive on back dirt roads. Sideways power slides through turns, late breaking, etc. Blown engine. Badly blown engine.

I agree with your example.

Has Predictive not been carried over as a TS requirement from QS-9000?

Predictive maintenance is still there in 7.5.1.4 "The organization shall utilize predictive maintenance methods to continually improve ...."

I didn't really look, but would have been amazed had it not been. It was such a big deal in QS-9000 that it was a given to be ready for serious discussion of. I can't remember whether that was in the old 1995 version or came with the '98 revision, though.

If I remember correctly it was a new addition in the '98 revision. If it had been in the '95 edition, my company could have saved over $70,000 in repair costs and 3 months of down time on one of our pieces of equipment (replacement cams built-to-order in Japan). Oil analysis can definitely pay for itself! We also bought a "heat gun" to check motors with. We tracked the temperatures and if they started to trend up, we knew it was time to schedule some maintenance.

Hi Guys,

Can anyone help me with WI for predictive & preventive Maintenance in Clause 7.1.5.4 ISO/TS 16949.Pls advise.

thanks

Yes, I have Procedure for predictive & preventive Maintenance in Clause 7.1.5.4 ISO/TS 16949.

Since I have limitation to attach the files, Give me your mail Id or should I send it to Mark who will attach it on Board.

Hi Mr.Manoj,

Pls email to me at : nathan@wheels.net.my

Thanks. :D

Hi, Mr.Manoj,

Sorry to bother you but I havent received file attachment from you.

thanks

nathan

]Hi, Mr.Manoj,

Sorry to bother you but I havent received file attachment from you.

thanks

nathan

]Hi, Mr.Manoj,

Sorry to bother you but I havent received file attachment from you.

thanks

nathan
Try sending a direct e-mail or a private message to Manoj. Open his post and click on his user name in the upper left corner, then select "Send a private message to..." or "Send e-mail to..."

Hi Mr.Manoj,

Sorry to bother you i have sent email to you regarding the WI.have received my email.

thanks

nathan

From Manoj Mathur.

Thanks!

Hi, Mr.Manoj,

Thanks for your reply,but im looking Maintenance Flow for Preventive & Predictive Maintenance.How is the flow goes thru for Preventive & Predictive.For example,pls go thru my attachment.which i sent thru my email.

I dont know to attach my attachment over here.

Thanks,

nathan
:thanx: