User talk:Noamany2

Agile Reliability Centered Maintenance

Agile Reliability Centered Maintenance is a new approach proposed by Ahmed Noaman Karar (Reliability Engineering and Asset Management Consultant) in 2019 to increase the classical RCM adaptability to AI, machine learning and other digital transformation era needs. Also, to overcome the classical RCM pitfalls which are:

A.Insufficient Equipment Failure Data In order for the RCM program to be effective, it needs to have historical data about equipment failure: the types of failures, the frequency of failures, and the root cause of failures. Without this data, the RCM program is based on guesswork. RCM is an applied engineering function. Engineering information is not successfully estimated in other engineering disciplines; it shouldn't be estimated in RCM either. The reason most people want to try RCM with the equipment failure data is that they trying to incorporate RCM too early in the improvement process. RCM is an advance technique that is used only when effective preventive and predictive programs are in place. In this case, a work order system or CMMS is already collecting equipment failure and repair data. Without these tools in place, the RCM program has virtually no probability of success.

B.Poor Results in the PM and PDM Efforts The preventive maintenance program has the goal of reducing the reactive maintenance activities to less than 20% of all the maintenance work. The predictive maintenance program has the goal of eliminating all unplanned breakdowns. If these two programs are not reducing results, why would any company want to move on to RCM? If the discipline are not in place to make the PM and PDM programs successful, how could any company think that it could be successful with an engineering approach to maintenance that require structure and discipline? In such a case, introducing an RCM program would reflect a lack of understanding of the evolution of maintenance. The company might also lack the organizational discipline to make any improvement initiative successful. Concentrating on the basics and maturing the improvement program in a focused manner will make the RCM program successful.

C. Poor Training in the RCM Methodology RCM is a structured and logic approach. It does not allow an individual to jump around and try one piece or another. Focus is required as is a methodology which must be learned if a company is to be successful. There are several approaches to the RCM methodology. Some have flexibility, whereas others are more rigid. Some require a lot of data, others less. Some approaches are more successful in an industry than another. It is up to the company to select the RCM approaches that fits its needs. However, once the approach has been decided upon, all of the employees involved in the RCM effort should be trained to a high degree of proficiency in the appropriate RCM techniques. One of the major factors contributing to a lack of training is a failure to understand the complexity of the RCM. If it is thought of as another "maintenance" thing, then the complexity may be misunderstood. The RCM program may be viewed like one of the many things that maintenance does and the employee can figure it out. But with RCM, this is not the case. The investment in training will be paid for many times over by the RCM effort. Without the training the RCM effort will never achieve maximum benefits for the organization.

D. Lack of Organizational Buy-In The problem is related to the previous one. The lack of organization buy-in or support is created by a lack of understanding of what RCM really is and the benefits that can be achieved from a successful RCM program. There are two major issues: training and salesmanship. The training focuses on developing the business case for RCM. What are the opportunities? What are the current losses? How much the losses could be reduced? How much will RCM cost? These are questions that must be answered to achieve long-term management support. Salesmanship involves putting the business case together in such a manner that upper management can understand it clearly enough to support it. When selling management on the concept of RCM, remember that few plant managers or controllers really understand what MTBF and MTTR (Mean Time To Repair) mean. However, if you show a cost-benefit analysis or a return-on-investment case study, then you have their attention. Using terms and tools they understand sells the program.

E. Insufficient Staffing for the Program RCM is not a spare time activity, nor is it undertaken instead of other maintenance initiatives. It is an additional task that requires additional funding for tools and personnel. After all, it will produce additional saving. Despite current trends of not adding personnel, if the RCM program is to be successful, then a company will have to staff the program. If not, the individuals performing RCM will take shortcuts and produce less than optimal results. The return on investment that was possible will never be realized. Most companies would certainly spend $200,000 to make $1 milion within a year. They would line up at an investment bank to get that deal. The same deal exists in their plants, yet isn't even advertised. What the companies must do is change their thinking about staffing levels.

F. Reactive or Instant RCM Efforts This problem arises after a company experiences a failure on a piece of equipment and someone reads an article about how RCM solved another company's problem with breakdowns. The person and the company then get hooked on the term reliability, but never understand it. All they know is that it might be the "silver bullet" that will solve the problem. RCM is not the silver bullet. It is however, a valuable tool, especially when coupled with a disciplined maintenance improvement program. Remember that a full maintenance improvement program takes an organization from reactive to world class maintenance. This journey takes three to five years with no successful shortcuts. It takes this long to learn the discipline and to change organizational patterns.

G. Short-Term Equipment Focus This problem occurs when individuals in the organization lack technical insight and do not understand the true life cycle of their equipment and related components. This lack of understanding leads to perspectives such as "this one lasted longer than last one. So our V-belts wear out every six months; we think that's pretty good! Those bearings actually lasted two months this time". The real questions should be: what is the design life of these basic components? Are companies really getting the full life out of the components or are they just glad they lasted as long as they did? For companies to be successful with RCM, They must understand that their equipment can last longer than it currently does before it breaks or wears so much that it must be changed

H. Poor Organizational Discipline This problem is related to lack of focus. The organization needs to be so focused on its vision, the improvement plan and the implementation methodology needed to achieve its goals, that it cannot be distracted. Today a lot of management changes are made as people come and go from an organization.

These changes can cause a lack of focus or vision. The relentless management changes in some companies inspired the term bungee manager. With this type of turnover, the organization develops the attitude, "we don't like these changes; let's wait a while and a new manager will replace this one; maybe we will like his or her ideas better".

The organization never develops the discipline to stick to any improvement methodology. Any improvement effort is not in place long enough to become ingrained in the company's culture. Thus, no commitment develops and long-term improvements are never made. Strong, committed leader ship is critical to developing a disciplined focused organization

^[1]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Lacks significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources - fails WP:GNG.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Noamany2/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Noamany2/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 05:37, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Noamany2! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Dan arndt (talk) 05:37, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Noamany2/sandbox

Hello, Noamany2. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

^ Reliability Centered Maintenance Quality in Oil and Gas Field Guidelines to improve your RCM quality (1. Auflage, neue Ausgabe ed.). ISBN 3659918741.

[1] Reliability Centered Maintenance Quality in Oil and Gas Field Guidelines to improve your RCM quality (1. Auflage, neue Ausgabe ed.). ISBN 3659918741.

[1]