Over the past 20 years, many US plants have invested heavily in condition monitoring technologies such as vibration, oil analysis, thermography, and motor circuit evaluation to provide an accurate prediction of plant equipment problems. These predictive maintenance programs use best of breed technical equipment along with trained and certified analysts, and they often produce solid technical results. Each month valid condition monitoring results are produced and distributed to plant maintenance and operations personnel. So why do critical machines that have been identified as degraded in advance of continue to fail in service? Why do many predictive maintenance programs have their funding and staff cut at the first sign of a sales decline?The problem is actually that plant management implemented condition monitoring without laying the groundwork for Condition-Based Maintenance. What's the difference? Condition monitoring is largely a technology and training issue while Condition-Based Maintenance requires the existence of a reliability culture involving both operations and maintenance. Innovative plants such as Eastman Chemicals in Kingsport, Tennessee have found that a consistent program of communication and accountability have helped them to instill and sustain that type of Condition-Based Maintenance culture.
展开▼
