A staggering 69 percent of plants experience unplanned outages at least once a month
Published on : Friday 15-12-2023
Amit Gupta, Division President, Motion Services, ABB India Ltd.
ABB India Ltd.
The recent survey on Reliability by ABB draws upon the connection between maintenance and reliability. Are there really any surprises here, or just a confirmation of what is widely known about most companies still relying on ‘run-to-fail’ maintenance?
Rather than surprising, I would say the survey reveals interesting insights into a changing trend. The survey showcases that while companies still rely on “periodic preventive maintenance” as their primary maintenance plan, there is a noticeable shift away from the riskier “run to fail” strategy towards “outcome-based” maintenance. This shift suggests a need for equipment manufacturers like ABB, including my division, to proactively adapt by designing equipment that is ready for digital, outcome-based maintenance. We also see the need to retrofit existing installed bases to align with this strategy, and I'm confident that with the right tools and cost-effective monitoring solutions, this shift will be swift.
Equipment failure causing unplanned downtime leads to significant loss of production. How serious and widespread is this problem?
Equipment failure is a constant concern that can significantly disrupt productivity and impact profitability. As Murphy’s Law aptly puts it, "Anything that can go wrong will go wrong, and at the worst possible time". This unpredictability can lead to severe consequences. The survey findings show that a staggering 69% of plants experience unplanned outages at least once a month, which is quite alarming. A substantial portion of this can be attributed to the prevalent use of "run to fail" maintenance strategies. In process industries, time-based maintenance strategies can serve the objective, but at the same time, even a small part's downtime can ripple through the entire operation. To address this issue, I advocate for the adoption of outcome-based maintenance strategies and diagnostics through the digital enablement of mission-critical equipment. Moreover, engaging equipment experts’ through ABB Motion OneCare service agreement is vital to ensure operational continuity.
The survey notes that reliability, safety and energy efficiency are the top three priorities when buying new equipment. But is this actually happening in practice?
While the survey underscores the paramount importance of reliability, safety, and energy efficiency in equipment procurement, it's crucial to understand their practical adoption. In practice, energy efficiency often undergoes meticulous evaluation, comparison, and monetisation. In contrast, the assessment of reliability and safety often relies on historical experience and industry perception. Decision-makers tend to lean on the experiences of industry peers when selecting equipment models and makes. In certain process industries, equipment and process safety are assessed and ranked based on criticality, which drives the prioritisation of equipment selection and maintenance. I'd like to highlight real-world examples, such as the increasing adoption of variable frequency drives for motor-driven systems, as evidence of the alignment with energy efficiency and reliability objectives. Additionally, industries like discrete manufacturing and transportation rigorously evaluate equipment for safety and reliability, both during procurement and factory testing.
One of the findings indicates that the quest for reliability is not backed by effective maintenance strategies. What are the reasons for this failure?
It's worth noting that despite the earnest pursuit of reliability, it often falls short due to a lack of robust maintenance strategies. Delving into the underlying causes of this shortcoming can shed light on the issue. The ageing begins as soon as the equipment is commissioned and, at times, even during storage. Factors contributing to this ageing include wear and tear, the relentless influence of the external environment, and improper usage. Improper usage encompasses overuse, overloading, and misapplication, all of which are challenging to predict and preempt. Traditional time-based maintenance, in many cases, proves inadequate in addressing these unpredictable challenges.
For instance, current VFD maintenance emphasizes routine cleaning and timed component replacements. Yet, crucial components like IGBTs and capacitors, susceptible to environmental stress and usage factors, often go unnoticed. Resolving this requires insights into operating conditions, achievable through advanced digital offerings.
A comprehensive approach to maintenance management is imperative, including the collection and analysis of data, and responsive corrective actions. Furthermore, I recommend exploring outcome-based models like reliability centred maintenance and even move to performance-based contracting with suppliers to mitigate the risks associated with the downtime.
How different is the position in India vis-a-vis the global situation?
In India, digitalisation has been rapidly gaining prominence in the past few years. Given the current industrial growth, there's mounting pressure to optimise our assets, making outcome-based maintenance and reliability-centred services increasingly crucial. While we have made strides, there is still ample room for improvement, particularly in introducing new business models and infusing sustainability into our service and maintenance programs. Notably, industrial buyers in India have started to consider the concept of life cycle cost in their equipment acquisitions, both from the initial cost and energy cost perspectives. Although the idea of maintenance life cycle cost has made an appearance, it's yet to gain full traction. For instance, the return on investment (RoI) for condition monitoring systems may take a couple of years to materialise, and the evaluation can at times be intricate. However, the positive impacts of such investments are tangible and underscore the direction we need to move in.
Digital tools today offer numerous solutions like condition based monitoring. Ideally what should be the maintenance strategy for a typical company?
When considering the ideal maintenance strategy for a typical company, it's essential to recognise the disparities in digitalisation at different levels. While digitalisation in process automation and control has reached a mature stage, the same cannot be said for equipment-level digitalisation. To illustrate, let's take the example of a motor-driven system, which comprises various components such as the electric motor, driven equipment (e.g., compressor, pump, crusher), transmission equipment (e.g., gearbox and coupling), the motor control centre, transformer, and increasingly, variable frequency drives for speed regulation. For such systems, an integrated condition monitoring approach that aggregates both continuous and discrete data into a unified platform can be incredibly beneficial. This approach allows us to monitor individual parts of the system and correlate trends. For instance, the deterioration of a bearing in a pump would manifest not only in motor performance but also in the current profile from the variable frequency drive. In such cases, a planned system shutdown to replace the pump bearing could also be utilised to address any other impending issues in the drive train.
Incorporating Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) systems for continuous condition monitoring, along with a few offline measurements, serves as leading indicators. For example, at ABB we provide continuous remote monitoring of large motors enabled by IIoT device MACHsense-R, as well as employing the Life Expectancy Analysis Program (LEAP) for offline condition inspection and insulation health evaluation. Through these tools we can continue to improve prediction accuracy and reduce uncertainty within maintenance. By correlating the various condition-monitored data, we can increase our confidence and pave the way for better maintenance strategies thereby reducing downtime.
As these digital offerings become robust and new business models are built, customers’ trust level in them increases, giving customers the option to focus on their own core and opt for performance and outcome-based contracting for maintenance.
Should buyers rely on maintenance services offered by the equipment vendors or plan their own strategies with third party service providers?
The decision of whether to rely on maintenance services from equipment vendors or formulate independent strategies with third-party service providers hinges on various factors. In the realm of outsourcing, a key consideration is partnering risk. Generally, performance-based contracting based on outcome-based business models is most effectively achieved through the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) or a provider with a comparable level of expertise, particularly for extended periods, such as 3 to 5 years. Performance outcomes encompass aspects like uptime, equipment and maintenance efficiency, overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), enhanced reliability, and cost reduction opportunities.
With performance based contracting the risks of obsolescence of equipment can be passed on to the equipment manufacturers, who in turn can introduce circularity concepts through refurbishment and upgrades, effectively extending the life cycle of equipment. This approach aligns with the overarching goal of promoting a sustainable and efficient operational ecosystem through the outcome and condition-based maintenance strategies.
