Identifying Rework in Maintenance or Craftsman Operations

[mooreke3]

Our chemical manufacturing facility has a resident maintenance department (pipefitters, carpenters, mechanics, etc) who are trying to improve the effectiveness of their own operations. We are having difficulty identifying and quantifying their rework. The problem is partly our system definition (or lack of) of what is maintenance rework, and partly cultural- the craftsman may not recognize or agree that the work they are performing is 'rework'. Has anyone implemented a maintenance (craftsman) rework program? Thanks in advance for those that share the 'how-to' implement.

 

[BradM]

Hello there!

I don't understand this part:

We are having difficulty identifying and quantifying their rework.

Are you stating that they do some initial level of work to contribute to the product/process; then, they do some additional level of rework, where they redo something they have already done?

How do they execute their work at your facility? Do they utilize work orders?

 

[mooreke3]

A work order is submitted to request some type of work and work is performed. Two (at least two) scenarios are then possible. If the equipment is immediately needed, a problem may surface immediately. Perhaps a gasket just needs a little more torque. Craftsman don't always recognize this as rework since some gaskets relax naturally. The equipment may not be needed right away so a problem is not identified until later, although the perfunctory check of the equipment was done at the initial time of service. It becomes difficult to determine if the problem is related to the original work.

Thanks for asking for the clarification. Let me know if more info is needed.

 

[ScottK]

So -

A pipe is set and leaks through a fitting as soon flow is introduced is clearly a need for rework - whether from a bad part or from poor installation.

If a pipe is set and leaks through a fitting after a week of normal use... well, I'm not so sure that is rework as the fault may not be a bad installation or part... it could be vibration, heat, whatever.

I think you may have to make a cut and dry rule an run with it....and have the craftsmen get beyond the stigma of "rework", assuring them they won't be rated by it because "Rework" can be attributed to poor workmanship as well as bad repair part.
I know that can be hard - I ran an maintenance department such as you're describing for a while.

 

[BradM]

So -

A pipe is set and leaks through a fitting as soon flow is introduced is clearly a need for rework - whether from a bad part or from poor installation.

If a pipe is set and leaks through a fitting after a week of normal use... well, I'm not so sure that is rework as the fault may not be a bad installation or part... it could be vibration, heat, whatever.

I think you may have to make a cut and dry rule an run with it....and have the craftsmen get beyond the stigma of "rework", assuring them they won't be rated by it because "Rework" can be attributed to poor workmanship as well as bad repair part.
I know that can be hard - I ran an maintenance department such as you're describing for a while.

Good points, Scott.

Another thought occurred to me. If you know you will have to come back to it, a gasked/flange needing adjustment through normal stress/relaxation and such, may call that activity something other than rework. Or, maybe you can have two phases to a work order, the initial activity; then, a second activity where they verify no changes have occurred since the initial work.

So, like Scott stated, clearly identify what activities are labeled, and how they should be handled. If the workers realize that they won't be penalized for having to do the second phase work, they should be OK with it.

 

[DrM2u]

A work order is submitted to request some type of work and work is performed. Two (at least two) scenarios are then possible. If the equipment is immediately needed, a problem may surface immediately. Perhaps a gasket just needs a little more torque. Craftsman don't always recognize this as rework since some gaskets relax naturally. The equipment may not be needed right away so a problem is not identified until later, although the perfunctory check of the equipment was done at the initial time of service. It becomes difficult to determine if the problem is related to the original work.

Thanks for asking for the clarification. Let me know if more info is needed.

My question is why do you need to quantify their rework? How is this performance indicator (maintenance rework) impacting your company's bottom line (directly or indirectly)? If it is not then why spent time and resources monitoring it? Please help me understand the benefit of what you are trying to do.

 

[ScottK]

My question is why do you need to quantify their rework? How is this performance indicator (maintenance rework) impacting your company's bottom line (directly or indirectly)? If it is not then why spent time and resources monitoring it? Please help me understand the benefit of what you are trying to do.

Consider the forum section this is in... Lean Manufacturing.
Rework, of course, is a major Lean concern because it's waste.

As why he's leaning his maintenance department, I kind of had a similar thought to what you are asking.... the concept is admirable but it the reward worth the effort? What size is the maintenance department to warrant the process? Not criticizing, just curious.

 

[mooreke3]

We are a large manufacturing site and our maintenance dept is 200-350 people. Effective tool time directly affects our bottom line, our production equipment availability, as well as aligning with our overall site lean philosphophy.

 

[ScottK]

We are a large manufacturing site and our maintenance dept is 200-350 people. Effective tool time directly affects our bottom line, our production equipment availability, as well as aligning with our overall site lean philosphophy.

wow. That's pretty large. Certainly some savings in that.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Our chemical manufacturing facility has a resident maintenance department (pipefitters, carpenters, mechanics, etc) who are trying to improve the effectiveness of their own operations. We are having difficulty identifying and quantifying their rework. The problem is partly our system definition (or lack of) of what is maintenance rework, and partly cultural- the craftsman may not recognize or agree that the work they are performing is 'rework'. Has anyone implemented a maintenance (craftsman) rework program? Thanks in advance for those that share the 'how-to' implement.

You have a unique situation because of the size and scope of your maintenance process and number of personnel is significant. Measuring performance will certainly help improve things.

I think your post contains your answer. I think you must "define" what is and is not rework. Generally, you may look at it as work where the outcome did not perform as expected. Then, further work, or "rework" is called for. The tricky part is getting personnel to agree to flag their own rework, rather than just correct it. Since you mentioned they want to measure it, agreeing on the parameters of what to flag seems to be the crux of the matter.