The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.htm
BIJ
21,2
Strategic approach to breakdown
maintenance on construction
plant – UAE perspective
226
P.B. Ahamed Mohideen
Received 1 May 2012
Revised 19 June 2012
Accepted 19 June 2012
Plant Maintenance, ASCON, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and
M. Ramachandran
Bits Palani Dubai Campus, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Abstract
Benchmarking: An International
Journal
Vol. 21 No. 2, 2014
pp. 226-252
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1463-5771
DOI 10.1108/BIJ-05-2012-0030
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a systematic strategic approach to handle
corrective maintenance onto the failures/breakdowns of construction equipment. For the maintenance
crew/team, a breakdown code management is proposed, which will provide focused and unambiguous
approach to manage any kind of breakdowns in construction equipments.
Design/methodology/approach – The past breakdown records of a construction organization in
the UAE are considered for analysis. From the failure data, through cause effect analysis (CEA) tools,
the components and the breakdown codes namely breakdown main codes (BMC) and breakdown
sub-codes (BSC) are formulated. With Pareto analysis, the critical codes are identified and validated
through failure modes and effects analyses (FMEA) tools for the critical effect on the affected
components. From this identified BSC’s further closer failure identification codes namely breakdown
symptom codes (BSyC) and breakdown reason codes (BRC) are identified through fault tree
analysis (FTA) tools. The approach to modified breakdown maintenance management (MB2M) with
breakdown maintenance protocol (BMP) is envisaged.
Findings – The study was conducted on four different types of heavy lifting/earth moving/material
handling system of equipment and further focused with two earth moving equipment namely dumpers
and wheel loaders. Failure analysis is performed and the failure ratio and the component contribution to
the failures are identified. Based on the information, the preliminary codes namely BMC and BSC are
identified through CEAtools and the BMC and BSC are identified to find the most contributing codes to the
maximum number of failures through Pareto analysis. Further the critical sub-codes are further verified
through FMEA tools on the severity levels of the sub components due to these codes. The FTA methods
are used to identify the closer reasoning and relations of these codes and the further codes namely BSyC
and BRC are identified which are the exact cause of the failures. The management of breakdowns is further
proposed through MB2M which includes BMP which provides all resources for the breakdowns.
Research limitations/implications – The failure data collected are only pertaining to the Middle
East region and applicable to similar regions for similar plant mix in construction companies. The
sample equipment is only part representative of the construction equipment. A more robust model can
be suggested in the future covering all aspects and for other regions as well.
Practical implications – The proposed methodology and model approach is highly adaptable to
similar industries operating in the Middle East countries.
Originality/value – Many authors have studied the preventive maintenance models and procedures
and proposals have been proposed. On the breakdown maintenance management of construction
equipment, very few studies have been proposed mostly on the cost analysis. This model attempts to
provide a code management solution to manage the unpredictable failures in construction equipment
through failure data analysis on a construction organization.
Keywords Construction, Pareto analysis, Cause effect analysis, Failure mode effect analysis,
Fault tree analysis, Plant and equipment
Paper type Research paper
Introduction:
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) construction industry is expected to witness a
compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of around 20 percent from 2010 to 2013,
according to the “UAE Construction Industry Outlook for 2012” report by industry
intelligence provider RNCOS, as rapid economic development continues to drive
construction activities and infrastructure development in the emirate. The construction
industry always aims at improving the quality standards of the people of the world and
the environment, by innovations in new materials, new systems, execution techniques,
safety, machineries, etc. The building and construction sector is the third largest sector
of the UAE economy after oil and trade and it has experienced rapid growth in recent
years. The level of construction spending per capita is high – second only to Japan. The
future prospects for the sector in the UAE also hold much promise. The recent
worldwide economic downturn has meant changes in the UAE’s dynamic business
environment. With less construction work available and heavy competition for projects,
construction companies working in the UAE have been forced to reassess their
strategies in order to remain viable.
The clients of UAE who award the construction contracts have decision criteria which
include the company’s performance on quality, safety and as well the strength of their fleet
(plant and equipment). The relative maintenance management systems followed by these
companies which enable reliability of these equipment are also considered as an
evaluation factor by the clients. Essentially it is important to have consistent and efficient
maintenance management systems, for the construction companies operating in the UAE
and in every other nation, for ensuring their continuity in business.
For construction companies, as the plant and equipment yields extra output,
productivity, reduced manpower, resources, ease of work, providing easy approach on
complexity, timely execution, etc. which all directly and indirectly improve the overall
improvement on the cost, time and quality and hence providing better profitability to
the construction project, the plant and equipment have to be always available for
useful service for effective execution of the construction projects.
Maintenance, as a system, plays a key role in reducing cost, minimizing equipment
downtime, improving quality, increasing productivity, providing reliable equipment and,
as a result, achieving the organizational goals and objectives (Bashiri et al., 2011). Plant
and equipment perform to their optimum level if they are maintained properly. Cost
reduction in the maintenance process can add further improvements to the enterprise
profit, while accurate and fool proof maintenance action can sustain continuous and
reliable operation of the equipments. The inter dependent activities in construction
industry requires the continuous working of all the machineries at all times without
interruption for the better progress of the projects, enhanced productivity and desired
profits (Waeyenbergh and Pintelon, 2002).
Construction equipment breakdown attributes
As the machinery dependency rate has become vital in all trades of work, it is imperative
that all the machineries perform their function to the optimum level. For the intended and
optimum performance of the machineries, the maintenance of the same is very much
essential. Whatever may be the trade or field, maintenance is paramount, at least to have a
trouble free working environment, for various systems, equipments and fields. Cost
reduction in the maintenance process whether it is preventive or corrective in nature,
Strategic
approach
227
BIJ
21,2
228
can add further improvements to the enterprise profit, while accurate and fool proof
maintenance action can sustain continuous and reliable operation of the equipments.
Maintenance management is the systems and procedures tailor made for the
organization’s plant and equipment so that they are maintained to the optimum level with
least cost and maximum efficiency. It is also about optimization of one/all of the
maintenance strategies like breakdown maintenance, preventive maintenance, predictive
maintenance, condition based maintenance and reliability centered maintenance, in an
orderly manner to have an effective maintenance system (Mishra and Pathak, 2002).
The importance of the maintenance on the plant and equipment is such that, more
enlightened companies have demonstrated an increased production capacity by as
much as 20 percent by implementing proper maintenance management systems in
their organizations (Ricky, 2003). Etienne-Hamilton (1994), envisaged maintenance
functions as a full partner of every organization striving together with it all the other
functions to achieve the firm’s strategic goals. There has been an exponential growth
on the new maintenance concepts and techniques. Hundreds have been developed over
the past years, and more are emerging.
The breakdown of equipment occurs due to the unpredictable failure of components
and due to gradual wear and tear of the parts, which cannot be prevented. In order to
have a trouble free working of these equipment there need to be a right strategy of
maintenance. Even with the right maintenance strategy in place, the breakdown of
these plants is inevitable and unavoidable. The construction plant breakdowns make
massive disruption to the smooth construction activities which are inter dependent and
affect the overall productivity and efficiency of the construction schedules. The
breakdowns should not be underestimated since they tend to make the project overrun
on time and results in subsequent loss of revenue to the project. Repeated breakdowns
will almost certainly result in delays to the contract, loss of client goodwill, loss of
company reputation, risk to safety, etc.
As mentioned in Figure 1, the attributes for construction equipment failures.
The reasons can be due to the attributes mentioned in Figure 1.
The newer developments in the breakdown maintenance management include
(Figure 2):
.
Decision support tools, such as hazard studies like cause effect analysis (CEA)
tools, failure modes and effects analyses (FMEA) and expert systems.
.
FLOW process analysis including fault tree methods fault tree analysis (FTA) to
find out route causes.
.
Improved maintenance techniques, such as condition monitoring, breakdown
models, etc.
.
Selecting the equipments which have the designs with a much greater emphasis
on reliability and maintainability.
.
To create a major shift in organizational thinking towards participation, team
working and flexibility.
.
Improvising the interest on breakdown maintenance performance by the crew,
by adopting easier approach towards execution method, etc.
A major challenge, faced by construction industry maintenance personal nowadays is
to learn what these techniques are, and also to decide which are worthwhile and not
Strategic
approach
229
Figure 1.
Attributes of construction
equipment failures
implemented in their own organizations. If the right choices and strategies are
implemented, it is possible to improve the asset performance and at the same time,
reduce the cost of maintenance and can be summarized as follows:
.
To select the most appropriate techniques to deal with each type of failure
process in order to fulfill all the expectations of the owners of the assets, the users
of the assets and of society as a whole.
.
To make the techniques to be more innovative and to remove the concept of
ambiguity and fear amongst maintenance crew by way of its easy approach and
clear directives.
.
In the most cost effective and enduring manner with the active support and
cooperation of all the people involved including the operatives, end-users and so on.
.
To provide generalized approach/method which can provide ready-made
solution to many problem areas and act as a model tool which can be easily
applied by the crew.
.
To remove the grey areas and ambiguities when approaching and executing
repair on a failed system/component/process.
BIJ
21,2
230
Figure 2.
Newer developments
and focus on the
breakdown maintenance
management model
.
To have determination and deterrent free execution on breakdown maintenance
through right protocols.
Literature review
According to Campbell and Jardin (2001) maintenance is a business process turning
inputs into usable outputs. Maintenance costs are a major part of the total operating
costs of all manufacturing or production plants, and depending on the specific industry,
maintenance costs can represent between 15 and 60 percent of the cost of the goods
produced (Mobley, 2002). As per Varghese (2000) given that 20 percent of the cost of such
projects is associated with the required construction equipment, it is expected that the
demand for construction equipment will increase substantially in the coming years.
The inter dependant activities in construction field requires the continuous working of
all the machineries at all times without interruption on the projects for better progress,
productivity, and profits. The machinery dependency rate has become very high due to
fast track projects in the present time (John, 2003). Fast track construction projects are
highly dependent on the construction machineries. Achieved availability is the probability
that a system or equipment, when used under stated conditions is an ideal support
environment (i.e. readily available tools, spares, personnel, etc.), which will operate
satisfactorily at any point in time (Blanchard and Fabrycky, 1998). The wear and tear rates
of the machineries are likely to be very high due to extreme conditions prevailing at
construction sites. Human operators in close proximity with the work operate most of the
machineries in the construction industry and the maintenance cannot be overlooked
(Randy and Burl, 1988). The optimal level of maintenance occurs at the point of minimal
total maintenance costs – the point where the sum of the cost of equipment losses and
maintenance activity costs is minimized (Fredendall et al., 1997). More stand-by units may
increase the system’s availability but do not decrease the incidents of system failures
(Kumar and Granholm, 1998). Reliability, availability and maintenance (RAM) models
represent the logical relationships between each plant component, system and human
action concerning their effects on generation and can be used to quantitatively predict the
magnitude of each individual contributor to losses described by the plant load duration
curve (International Atomic Energy Agency, 2001).
In the future the only companies left in the business will be those who know and are
able to control the reliability of their products (Kececioglu, 1991). Hall and Daneshmend
(2003) reiterated that reliability and availability modelling can be viewed as an integral
part of a unified “analysis” function, dealing with a myriad of information flows including
data from sensors on equipment, data and information from operator interfaces on-board
equipment, historical operational and maintenance information, current operational and
maintenance information. Collections of quality failure and repair data are usually
necessary in system reliability and availability analysis for getting reliable and accurate
results (Blischke and Murthy, 2003). According to Fonseca and Knapp (2001) in reliability
and maintainability studies a small number of researchers have seriously addressed the
issue of handling uncertainties especially related with failure data of systems.
Lu and Meeker (2007) developed general statistical models and data analysis
methods for using degradation measures to estimate a time-to-failure distribution.
Lu et al. (2007) extended the problem of reliability estimation to a component operating
in real-time changing environments. Gebraeel et al. (2005) proposed an exponential
model in which the deterministic parameters represent a constant physical phenomenon
common to all the components of a given population, while the stochastic ones follow a
specific distribution and capture variations among individual components, nominally
identical. The distributions of the stochastic parameters across the population of
components (a priori distributions) together with the monitoring information collected
for each component (a posteriori distribution) are used to compute the residual life
distribution for the individual component. A Bayesian approach is employed to update
the prior information of each individual component at any instant. Curcuru and Galante
(2010) proposed a procedure for computation of the maintenance time that minimizes the
global maintenance cost. By adopting a stochastic model for the degradation process
and by hypothesizing the use of an imperfect monitoring system, the procedure updates
by a Bayesian approach, the a priori information, using the data coming from the
monitoring system. Meselhy et al. (2010) developed a periodicity metric functional
resetting procedure to evaluate and quantify function resetting due to a given
maintenance policy to reduce complexity in the system. The developed periodicity
metric can be used as a criterion for comparing different maintenance policy alternatives
and as a tool for predicting system performance under a given maintenance policy.
Very few researchers have conducted studies done on the data capturing and
modeling of breakdowns as breakdowns contribute lots of uncertainties to the plant
Strategic
approach
231
BIJ
21,2
232
performance and productivity. Rapinder Sawhney (2009) mentions that tremendous
efforts have been made to develop different types of maintenance strategies for
enhancing the performance of equipment but nothing has been done to actually
streamline breakdown maintenance activities (BMA). The failures and breakdowns
occurs due to the unpredictable failure of components on the equipments and as well due
to the gradual wear and tear of the parts, which cannot be prevented during dynamic
working of these equipment with varied environmental conditions prevailing.
To ensure the plant achieves the desired performance, maintenance managers need a
good track of performance on maintenance process and maintenance results. This can be
attained through development and implementation of a rigorously defined performance
measurement framework and indicators that are able to measure important elements of
maintenance function performance (Peter et al., 2010.) Failures in production systems
may cause high losses, for instance in the form of lost production time or volume,
negative impact on the environment, lost customers, warranty payments, etc. (Todinov,
2006). Efficiency and effectiveness of the maintenance system are essential for
organizations’ success and survival. Parida et al. (2005) highlight the need for measuring
the system’s performance. Arts et al. (1998) point out that performance measures are
tools to achieve control in order to reduce maintenance costs and increase productivity.
If the only strategy of any organization is to react only when the machine fails, then
breakdown maintenance will also be called as run-to-failure maintenance and the
organization which follows such strategy is known to adopt only the reactive maintenance
strategy. Breakdown maintenance is also called as run-to-failure maintenance for
organization who does not have any maintenance functions/crew in place and generally
maintenance is always overlooked. It may be described as a fire-fighting approach to
maintenance and the equipment is allowed to run until failure (Swanson, 2001). All the
activities following the reactive maintenance strategy will be described as fire-fighting
approach techniques of maintenance. With the run to failure type of maintenance the
equipment is allowed to run until failure, then the failed equipment is repaired or replaced
(Paz and Leigh, 2004). In these strategies generally the maintenance activities are not
planned. Generally reengineering is always required for proper proactive maintenance in
industries (Mostafa, 2004). To ensure the plant achieves the desired performance,
maintenance managers need a good track of performance on maintenance process and
maintenance results. This can be attained through development and implementation of a
rigorously defined performance measurement framework and indicators that are able to
measure important elements of maintenance function performance (Peter et al., 2010.) The
costs for maintenance conformance are mainly associated with preventive maintenance,
but also some corrective maintenance must be accepted by the organization. Costs for
indispensable corrective maintenance relate to those corrective maintenance actions that
are indispensable. Salonen and Deleryd (2011) predicts the reasons for these kinds of
actions as that when no preventive actions are feasible for preventing the breakdowns to
occur, e.g. when components have random failure distribution and lack measurable
deterioration or when preventive actions are not financially justified.
Very few the authors have examined the effect of break down maintenance on the
construction plant. No detailed algorithms for breakdown maintenance in construction
plant or models based on the records of break down maintenance have been reported in the
literature. The current research work aims to develop a systematic procedure to identify a
strategic procedure to minimize the loss in a construction industry due to breakdown
maintenance. The study focuses on the study of the breakdowns in the system rather than
developing a preventive maintenance for the breakdowns, the focus is to how quickly the
system can recover from the break down that has incurred in the system. The real-time
reporting of the plant history is examined to understand and determine the factors
affecting the breakdown process, overcoming these factors to manage the breakdowns
effectively.
This current paper discusses the application of various breakdown maintenance
management improvement tools including decision support tools, RCA tools, CEA
tools, FMEA tools and the protocol approach systems which all augment further
values to the maintenance systems and strategies by reducing the downtime duration
and also will further pave the way for the effective realization of better productivities of
the plant and equipment involved in the construction industries. The breakdown codes
of breakdown main code (BMC), and breakdown sub-code (BSC) are further identifies
the breakdown system code (BSyc) and the breakdown reason code (BRC).
Optimization of the breakdown maintenance with better techniques will by all
means yield an effective maintenance system for the organizations.
Construction equipment breakdowns
Today world class competitiveness is a must for construction companies. With the
financial crisis in place all over the world, multi tasking, globalization, venturing into
new related fields, cutting of costs, ensuring effective utilization of the resources have
become necessary for the organizations. As the competition grows, there tends to be a
technological push combined with the market pull, and the increased number of
customer requirements at reduced costs put forward a lot of challenges for the
organizations, who need to ensure effective utilization of their resources and ensure at
least minimum profits. As the cost of operation needs to be reduced, even the equipment
manufacturers tend to make products, which may be subjected to speedy wear and tear
possibilities and reduced life cycles and to add more, these plant and equipments need to
work under higher stress always.
As most of the construction equipments perform their maximum hours of services
under extreme climatic conditions (ambient temperatures raising as high as 508C
sometimes unlike, Europe or Asia), as well as rugged working atmospheres in the UAE,
even with the adaptation of various preventive maintenance strategies on these
construction equipments the breakdowns of these equipments are inevitable and
unavoidable. As the breakdown of plant and equipment is a common unavoidable problem,
it is better to manage the breakdowns in an efficient manner. Hence good management
tools on breakdown management of construction equipment are always essential.
A tower crane breaking down in a construction site, creates chaos and leads to a
situation, where hundreds of workmen become idle due to stoppage of works which are
parallel and dependent. Whatever may be the trade or field, breakdown maintenance is
always unlike by the end-user as it is unproductive. But breakdowns are inevitable. When
any failure/breakdown occurs, on these plants, to bring back and to regain its intended
serviceability requirements, the breakdown maintenance process has to be flawless and also
speed is the essential factor. The repair has to be carried out during production/working
hours and continues up to continuous shifts till the problem is rectified, leading to high
labor costs. The supervision of the breakdown maintenance process also will have
Strategic
approach
233
BIJ
21,2
234
limitations and may become less as the duration extends due to continuance of the
breakdown, which really affects the quality of breakdown maintenance process.
Generally people make a faulty assumption that the cost of the breakdown is the
only cost incurred in getting the equipment back into service, but the true cost is
considerably higher. The overall costs include, the direct cost of the repair, the on-costs
of wages paid to idle operatives, the cost of production affected, cost of alternate plants
arranged, cost of regaining the momentum, cost due of loss of goodwill from the
clients/customers and the overall cost of loss in production. When these additional
costs are added to the breakdown/emergency repair cost in terms of material and
labour, the cost of the breakdown becomes substantial.
It also follows the fact that the magnitude of the breakdown repairs and the process
duration will be greater, than if the rectification was carried out under controlled
conditions, so preventing premature failure even after rectification. Furthermore, if
spare parts are not immediately available in the event of an unexpected breakdown,
one may face the extra costs of sub-contracting and leasing equipment for production
during the extended period of shutdown while the spare parts are manufactured and
fitted, thus increasing the cost. It can, therefore, be stated that normally, unless an item
of equipment is so situated that it will not interrupt the intended production,
breakdown maintenance is inherently, inefficient on all accounts, creating an
indeterminate workload and loss of morale on the maintenance staff and there can be
no justification for the continued breakdowns in construction industry.
With all the above facts in place it is very much evident that the breakdown
maintenance execution process is generally not a likeable and preferred one as it involves
cost, human efforts and will not be prudent, if executed in an unplanned, non-sequential
manner. The proposed newer methods and tools paves way for better execution of the
breakdown maintenance and will help in the long way to reduce the breakdown durations,
to improve on the breakdown frequencies and also to create interest amongst the crew to
execute the breakdown maintenance effectively.
Research methodology
As per the previous paper, five year breakdown data of major construction equipments
of a construction organization at Dubai, UAE have been studied effectively. The
breakdown performance is tabulated from the breakdown registers, plant history
cards, job cards for effectively identifying various types of breakdowns for a large
category of construction equipment.
The five year analysis yielded various kinds of breakdowns and the related
breakdown factors. Based on the nature and cause of the breakdowns, the breakdown
reasons/parameters are formulated and coded as BMC, breakdown sub-codes (BSC).
Pareto analysis of the breakdowns are performed for breakdown reasons of each major
equipment, year-wise, and the 80 percent of the BMC and BSC are identified and
presented in the part 1 studies of this paper (Ahamed Mohideen et al., 2011). This paper
studies the verification of these selected BSC based on the severity effect of affected
components through FMEA tools. Further identification of breakdown symptom codes
(BSyC) which have the possible cause effect on the BSC and the breakdown reason codes
(BRC) which are the root causes of the individual problems are identified through FTA
methods. These codes help us to identify the major contributing elements of the
breakdowns and the related root causes of the breakdowns. Each BRC will be associated
with a loop combination of BMC-BSC-BSyC-BRC loop and will have an associated
breakdown maintenance protocol (BMP). Each BMP for each specific failure/breakdown
is a best fit solution for specific breakdown which will have stand-alone solution/work
around and the required resources to manage a specific breakdown with reference
to a component/system/machinery/fleet. Figure 3 details the flow process the
methodology followed in formulating the BSyC and the BRC for the construction
equipment.
Strategic
approach
235
Case study
The firm under investigation has more than 779 different construction machineries
which exclude transportation vehicles. The machineries mix included light equipment,
heavy equipment, light machinery, heavy plant, and heavy machinery. Since light
equipment (290) is relatively smaller in size, replacement is always possible. Light
equipments are not included in our study. Heavy plant like tower cranes and hoists (81)
which operate basically with electric power only were not considered for analysis.
The selected equipment included, wheel loaders, skid steer loaders, back hoe
loaders, dumpers, mobile cranes, forklifts, compressors, generators and roller
compactors. The total number of machineries considered is 180. This represents
36.81 percent of the population of the equipment excluding the light equipment. A total
of 881 (Table I) breakdowns from the five year record of the breakdown maintenance
data for the selected plant and equipment have been analyzed. The documents
considered include the breakdown registers, jobs cards, plant history cards, etc.
The breakdown data of the selected nine machineries has been taken from the list of
total breakdown records of all the machineries available with the target organization.
Since the focus is on these nine machineries, the list of 881 breakdown data only on these
machineries has been considered for the analysis. To determine the most critical
machine in the system, the ratio of the number of breakdown to available machines
Figure 3.
Flow process of the MB2M
Table I.
Breakdown details
of the critical machines
in the system
9
4
5
6
7
8
3
2
1
Wheel
loader
Mobile
crane
Back hoe
loader
Fork lift
Skidsteer
Genset
Dumper
Air
compressor
Roller
compactor
Sl no. Machine
2006
Breakdown details of the critical machines in the system
2007
2008
2009
236
9
10
20
14
9
3
2
8
36
23
14
2
5
4
29
21
6
2
1.11
1.42
1.5
0.4
2
1.24
1.09
2.33
4.5
8
21
2
4
11
31
19
4
2
9
26
16
8
15
53
26
14
18
1.12
1.23
8
2
1.36
1.7
1.36
3.5
9
9
21
2
4
11
39
19
4
2
12
17
5
7
13
85
23
25
44
1.33
0.8
2.5
1.75
1.18
2.17
1.21
6.25
22
11
21
5
4
14
97
19
5
3
7
17
10
3
9
79
20
20
34
0.63
0.8
2
0.75
0.64
0.81
1.05
4
11.66
11
21
5
4
14
97
19
6
3
10
8
2
2
9
43
24
8
35
0.91
0.38
0.4
0.5
0.64
0.44
1.26
1.33
11.66
48
88
36
22
54
296
116
81
140
1.02
0.93
2.88
1.08
1.16
1.27
1.19
3.48
11.76
Average
No. of
Breakdown/ No. of
Breakdown/ No. of
Breakdown/ No. of
Breakdown/ No. of
breakdown/
breakdown/
machine
No. of
machine machine
No. of
machine machine
No. of
machine machine
No. of
machine machine No. of
machine
Total
machine
available breakdown/
ratio
available breakdown/
ratio
available breakdown/
ratio
available breakdown/
ratio
available breakdown
ratio
breakdowns
ratio
2005
BIJ
21,2
is calculated. The machine with the highest ratio is identified as the critical machine
as indicated in Table I. Wheel loaders, mobile cranes, back hoe loaders, generators and
dumpers are identified as the most critical machines with the highest breakdown order
in the system. Mobile cranes and generators being the utility and not only core
construction machines and find application in other fields of industry and as well they
are very much available in the market on rental basis as JIT, and hence wheel loaders and
the dumpers are considered for further focus study.
On the construction field the utilization of these wheel loaders and dumpers exist almost
to the entire duration of the project for various earth moving and material handling
operations and as well the availability of dumper on rental basis is almost scarce in the
market and wheel loader always find lots of demand with various construction companies
and the demand in the market is always high for this equipment. The last five year
breakdown records for the wheel loader and dumper are further examined. The breakdown
records are classified into main categories of failure namely: engine failures (mechanical
failure), transmission failures, propeller shaft failures, differential failures, axle/wheel
failures, steering failures, hydraulic failures, and electrical failures. A systematic
examination on various breakdowns is performed and is classified into one of the above
categories based on the major factor for failure as provided in Table II. The order of
frequency of breakdowns on both the equipment varied generally while wheel loader
accounted for more frequent failures on the wheel assembly where the dumper had more
frequent failures accounted on the engine side. Since these machines are critical in nature for
the analysis, all the failures on these equipment are considered to be critical and a detailed
analysis on breakdown codes for these equipment were to be performed (Figures 4 and 5).
The basic plant/equipment failure may happen due to any of the component or
multiples of components failures. As mentioned in above tables, the failures can be due
Sl no.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Sl no.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Wheel loader-analysis of type of failures based on occurrence (2005-2009)
Type failures
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Total
Wheel assembly
6
11
27
24
16
84
Hydraulic
0
2
3
3
9
17
Electrical
0
3
8
0
4
15
Engine
1
0
2
4
3
10
Axle drive
0
1
3
0
1
5
Differential
0
0
1
1
1
3
Steering
0
1
0
1
1
3
Transmission
1
0
0
1
0
2
Propeller shaft
1
0
0
0
0
1
Dumper-analysis of type of failures based on occurrence (2005-2009)
Description
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Total
Engine
6
10
8
4
7
35
Electrical
1
7
1
2
4
15
Clutch
4
2
6
2
0
14
Propeller shaft
2
3
3
1
4
13
Gear box
1
1
2
7
0
11
Wheel
7
0
0
0
3
10
Hydraulic
1
1
2
0
4
8
Drop box
0
1
1
2
2
6
Steering
1
1
0
1
1
4
Differential
0
0
0
1
1
2
Strategic
approach
237
Average
16.80
3.40
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.60
0.60
0.40
0.20
Average
7
3
2.8
2.6
2.2
2
1.6
1.2
0.8
0.4
Table II.
Types of failures on
wheel loader and dumper
BIJ
21,2
Process Flow of a Construction Mini Dumper
238
Electricals
Engine
Clutch
Hydraullcs
Steering
Chassis
Figure 4.
Process flow of the mini
dumper
Gear Box
Propeller
Shaft
Wheel
Assembly
Drop Box
Differentials
Process Flow of a wheel Loader
Wheel
Assembly
Axle Drive
(Right)
Electricals
Engine
Differential
(Front)
Propeller Shaft
Hydraullcs
Steering
Axle Drive
(Left)
Chassis
Figure 5.
Process flow of wheel
loader
Axle Drive
(Right)
Transmission
Propeller Shaft
Differential
(Rear)
Axle Drive
(Left)
Wheel
Assembly
Cabin
to engine, electrical, transmission, gear box, propeller, wheel, axle, hydraulic, steering
or other related component failures. The outcome of the CEA provided an insight into
the possible break down factors in the component systems of the equipment. These
breakdown factors revealed their relationships with the various components and their
impact on the overall performance of the machine.
To effectively categorize the breakdowns in relation with their components, various
codes namely BMC and BSC were developed in relation to various components. To identify
the BSC’s from BMC second level CEA is performed on the identified BMC as shown in
Figure 6. The BSCs are developed based on the various breakdown data, logical
discussions, and on the breakdown knowledge of the maintenance crew (Table III).
We use these inputs into the Pareto’s model and intend to study the effect of critical
breakdown codes on to the group of BMC which contribute to 80 percent of the
breakdowns and with that we identify the critical BMC’s and the subsequent BSC’s.
These BSC’s which are part of the critical BMC’s are verified with FMEA tools. The
focus of this tool is to identify the most contributing breakdown factors on the
construction equipment namely dumpers and wheel loaders, which accounts for
80 percent of the breakdowns, but less in numbers. With further detailed study of these
breakdown codes a proper system of breakdown maintenance management is
formulated. Basically this Pareto analysis help to understand the most contributing
Strategic
approach
239
Figure 6.
CAE diagrams to identify
the breakdown codes
breakdown factors, and we can improve upon the execution of breakdown maintenance
process by dissociating and relating this breakdown factors with further sub factors
and a good improved and a modified breakdown maintenance management (MB2M)
system is prepared which results in effective execution of breakdown maintenance.
Thus, significant factors based on their criticality are identified for the benefit of the
organization as a whole.
The critical BMC’s pertaining to Pareto study reveal the fact that the following
codes only attribute to 80 percent or more breakdowns to the dumpers and wheel
loaders are identified.
Based on these studies of Pareto analysis the critical contributing breakdown codes
namely BMC and their relative sub-codes, BSC’s are identified and tabulated. The total
number of initially arrived BMC codes, which were the causes of various breakdowns
of the components on wheel loaders and dumpers were 62 (which were the cause of
various breakdowns/failures on wheel loaders and dumpers for the year 2005-2009)
and have been reduced to 27 with the Pareto analysis. The results are tabulated below.
Similar exercises were performed with all the nine equipment under study and the
resultant BMC and BSC codes are listed in Table IV.
Failure mode effect analysis for critical BSC
FMEA is an analysis technique which facilitates the identification of potential problems
in the design or process by examining the effects of lower level failures. With FMEA
results actions and provisions are made to reduce the likelihood of the problem
occurrence and mitigating the relative risk, in case of occurrence of the problem. The
FMEA team determines, by failure mode analysis, the effect of each failure and identifies
single failure points that are critical. The approach involves statistical data collection
especially related with the frequency of subcomponent failures and their likelihood of
non-detectability and severity it imposes on system performance. The results of the
analysis help managers and engineers to identify the failure modes, their causes and
BIJ
21,2
240
Fault
main
Sl no. code
Engine failures
1
AA1
2
AA2
Break down main codes (BMC) and break down sub-codes (BSC)
Fault
subFault description code
Fault description
Solution
Engine major
overhauling
Engine over
heating
A6
A5
A17
A19
A24
A39
A42
A43
A44
3
AA3
Coolant oil
excessive
consumed
A3
Cool water leak –
radiator hose
Radiator service
A28
Engine low oil
pressure
A37
A1
A8
A38
A45
A50
A51
A53
5
Table III.
Breakdown main codes
(BSC) and breakdown
sub-codes (BSC)
AA5
Engine oil
excessive
consumed
Fan radiator pully lock
broken
Fan leaf broken –
radiator
Engine over heat
Belt cut
Radiator choked
Cool water leak –
radiator or tank
A27
AA4
Water leak – water
pump change
Engine fan belt cut
Cheased
A59
A2
A7
4
Engine cylinder head
gasket problem
Temperature increased
A4
A16
A18
Gasket changed
Temperature switch
changed
Water pump change
Engine fan belt changed
Engine overhauling
work
Fan radiator pully lock
changed
Fan leaf changed –
radiator
Radiator serviced
Radiator fan clutch/fan
belt changed
Radiator core changed
Radiator top tank
Radiator hose
Cool water leak radiator
service
Water leak rail pipe bolt Water rail pipe bolt
cut/repair
changed
Water leak/pump gasket Water pump gasket
changed
Oil pump problem
Oil pump kit changed
Engine overhauling
Radiator top tank
work
Oil pump leak
Pump kit changed
Engine oil, collenet oil
Oil coller serviced
mixing
Engine oil/fuel mixing
Injector and fuel pump
calibrated
Meter/oil viscose
Oil viscosity checked
Cut – engine work
Engine major
overhauling
Engine low oil pressure Engine overhauling
work
Oil seal leak – rear end Oil seal change
– fly wheel side
Oil leak – cover packing Cover packing changed
Oil leak – filter body
Filter body assay
changed
(continued)
Fault
main
Sl no. code
Break down main codes (BMC) and break down sub-codes (BSC)
Fault
subFault description code
Fault description
Solution
A26
A31
A32
A46
6
AA6
Engine vibration
A9
A10
A12
7
AA7
8
AA8
Engine knocking
noise
Engine speed
variation
A33
A30
A35
A36
AA9
10
AA10
11
AA11
12
AA12
Fuel pump failures
13
BB1
FIP, injector
calibration
14
BB2
15
BB3
Air relief valve
problem – compressor
Accelerator cable cut
A54
A55
Accelerator spring cut
Improper colour of –
exhaust
Engine starting
A41
trouble
Start
A34
Engine cranking
will not start
Timing cover seal
changed
Cooler body welded
Compressor unit – hose
changed
Oil separator hose cut/ Oil separator hose
compressor unit
changed
Engine mounting front r Engine mounting front R
changed
Engine mounting front L Engine mounting front L
changed
Engine mounting rear
Engine mounting rear L1
L1
changed
Valve leak
Air separator changed
Engine rpm suddenly
raised
Engine stops while
running
Problem
A40
9
Oil leak – timing cover
seal or crank seal
Oil leak cooler body
Oil leak
–
Display on LCD
241
Air relief valve kit
changed
Accelerator cable
changed
ECB board changed
Fuel control relay
changed
Cam shaft sensor
changed
Accelerator spring
changed
–
Fuel line checked, fuel
filter changed
Coupling changed
A49
Engine – compressor
coupling broken
Engine noise
–
–
Fan radiator pully lock
changed
–
B1
Fuel pump problem
Fuel pump calibrated
B15
Engine over heated
automatically tripped
Fuel pump problem
Injectors changed/
thoroughly flushed
Fuel pump calibrated
Fuel pump problem
Fuel pump calibrated
Proble
Working
Hand primer changed
Fuel lift pump changed
(continued)
Engine knocking B1
sound
Engine cranks but B1
did not start
B9
B20
Strategic
approach
Table III.
BIJ
21,2
Fault
main
Sl no. code
16
BB4
242
17
BB5
Break down main codes (BMC) and break down sub-codes (BSC)
Fault
subFault description code
Fault description
Solution
Engine hard to
start
Engine speed
variation
18
19
BB6
BB7
Engine vibration
Engine emits
white smoke
20
BB8
Lack of power
21
BB9
Excessive fuel
consumption
Table III.
Table IV.
Pareto analysis results
Sl no.
Equipment
1
2
Wheel loader
Dumper
Total BMC
B1
Fuel pump problem
Fuel pump calibrated
B16
Engine not cranking
B17
Problem
B2
Injector problem
Injector serviced fuel line
checked
Fuel line checked and
feed pump changed
Injector calibrated
B18
Low alternator problem
B2
B1
Injector problem
Fuel pump problem
Fuel line/injector/pump
recharge
Injector calibrated
Fuel pump calibrated
B2
B1
B2
B1
Injector problem
Fuel pump problem
Injector problem
Fuel pump problem
Injector calibrated
Fuel pump calibrated
Injector calibrated
Fuel pump calibrated
B2
B7
Injector problem
Fuel inlet pipe leak
Injector calibrated
Fuel inlet pipe changed
Pareto analysis on the BMCs
BMC contributor for 100%
breakdown (identified)
26
36
62
Critical BMC identified
based on Pareto analysis
11
16
27
correct them during the stages of design and production. It may also rank each failure
according to the criticality of a failure effect and its probability of occurring.
The BSC which are developed from the critical BMC’s should be verified and
ascertained properly that they are the true representative codes and a dependency rate
can be established. The failure mode effect analysis is performed on these selected BSC’s
to find out how influential these codes with respective to the various sub components
with which they are associated. This exercise helps us to know that if these sub
components which are associated with the selected BSC failure cause, are not having
higher severity ratings with the failure, then the selection of these BSC’s as the critical
BSC’s will not be a true statement. Hence we are finding few of the selected BSC’s and
their relative components severity ratings with the FMEA Analysis. The following
BSC’s are selected for analysis (Tables V and VI).
Failure mode and effect analysis (BSC – A38: engine oil and coolant oil mixing)
Failure effect
Failure
Effect
Component
Function
mode
Local
System
rate
Oil cooler
To maintain oil
temperature
Inter cooler
To maintain oil
temperature/friction
Water pump
To maintain engine
temperature
Cylinder head It houses the inlet and
assay
exhaust valve
arrangements and
continues coolant route
throughout the engine
Cylinder liner The cylinder liners
receives combustion heat
through the piston and
rings and transmit the
heat to the coolant
Engine block
Oil cooler
gasket/
”o” ring
damage
Inter
cooler
damage
Water
pump
seal cut
Water
pump
gasket
weak
Engine
cylinder
head
gasket
Engine
cylinder
head
crack/
water
gallery
Engine
liner
crack
Coolant oil
colour changed
Coolant oil
colour changed
Oil viscosity and Low
oil film
thickness
reduced
Lubrication not Low
getting properly
Engine oil level
increased
Radiator
Low
pressure
reduced/cooling
function will not
working
properly
High
Compression
reduced and
getting starting
treble with
emitting smoke
Coolant
continuous route
function failure/
too heat
developed
Combustion and High
stoke system
failure
Engine cooling
system failure/
performance
reduced
Emitting smoke Engine
with excessive
efficiency
sound
reduced
Liner “O” Cooling pressure
ring cut reduce/oil
pressure and
film reduced
It houses the engine parts Block
Engine
and oil/coolant route
crack –
compression
throughout the engine
coolant or reduced/
oil route excessive smoke
with noisy
developed
Strategic
approach
243
Very
high
Very
high
Decrease the
engine
performance
Medium
Oiling system
failure/getting
quick
High
A38 is the BSC denoting the engine oil and coolant oil mixing. The performance of the
engine is very much dependant on the engine oil. The engine oil’s purity level is
important for the lubrication of the engine internal parts and any contamination will
reduce the performance of the engine. This also results changes in volume of cooling oil,
Table V.
FMEA for engine oil and
coolant mixing
BIJ
21,2
244
Failure mode and effect analysis (BSC – L13: front bucket automatically lowered whole operating)
Failure effect
Failure
Effect
Component Function
mode
Local
System
rate
Operating
control
valve
Bucket
cylinder
Table VI.
FMEA for front bucket
automatic lowering
Solenoid
switch
To control pressure and oil flow
regulating function
Seals
and “o”
rings
Spool
and pins
and
valves
Convert fluid power to mechanical Ram
force and linear motion. Its main and
operation is pull and push
seals
operation
and
hoses
Gland
and
nuts
Its function is to control the flow Switch
oil to ram r cylinders
and
contacts
Hydraulic oil Oil level and
Medium
leaks
pressure
reduced
Oil leaks and Operation and
High
pressure
control unstable
released
Engine oil
pressure
reduced/
sound
developed
Cylinder
movements
too slow
Switch not
work
Engine oil
Very
high
lubrication
system failure
and engine
seized
Bucket
Medium
operation failure
Bucket tilting
and pull and
push operating
failure
Very
high
or/hence excess smoke from the engine and also creates more adverse effects due to wear
and tear on the engine. The parts which are associated with this failure effect include
cylinder head assembly, cylinder liner, water pump, engine block, oil cooler and the inter
cooler. When we analyze the severity rating of this component due to this sub-code, the
rating is very high and high, respectively, for two each of the four components, while low
for two of the components. This justifies that the sub-code BSC A38, is very critical in
nature for the performance of the engine and should be considered for further analysis on
breakdown maintenance.
L 13 – This BSC is related to the automatic lowering of the front bucket of the wheel
loader, dumper and other earth moving machinery. The front bucket is an important
component which performs the tilling/collection operation of the machine and has
sharp edged teeth in front. The automatic lowering of front bucket during operation
will lead to serious safety hazards and untoward happenings on the machine. The
operator will not have enough control on it or he will be seriously disturbed while
performing his operation of this machine. The related components which initiate this
failure or affected due to this failure include hydraulic cylinder, solenoid valve and the
control valve. The severity ratings of malfunctioning of the components are estimated
to be very high for two of the components and high for one of the components. Hence
this BSC Code L13 is a valid code and should be considered for further analysis.
FTA for arriving breakdown symptom and reason codes
FTA is one of the most widely used methods in system reliability and failure
probability analysis. A fault tree is a graphical representation of a logical structure
representing undesired events (“failures”) and their causes. The logical structure is
created by using logic gates and represent undesired events by using basic events.
Reliability parameters are assigned to the basic events.
The technique is widely used in system reliability studies. FTA offers the ability to
focus on an event of importance, such as a highly critical safety issue, and work to
minimize its occurrence or consequence. The probability of the top-level event can be
determined by using mathematical techniques. The resulting fault tree diagram is a
graphical representation of the chain of events in your system or process, built using
events and logical gate configurations.
FTA is acknowledged as a key tool for increasing safety. It is unique and
indispensable in analyzing risks and determining various combinations of hardware,
software, and human error failures that result in a specified risk or system failure.
FTA is useful both in designing new products/services and in dealing with
identified problems in existing products/services. In the quality planning process, the
analysis can be used to optimize process features and goals and to design for critical
factors and human error. As part of process improvement, it can be used to help
identify root causes of trouble and to design remedies and countermeasures.
This technique is used in determining the breakdown factors namely BSyC and
BRC. The BSC’s are subjected to the analysis of FMEA and subsequently the FTA is
performed to understand the logical reasoning of problems/failures to determine the
BSyC and BRC. Basically the root cause of the specific breakdown is known as the BRC
and the symptoms of this root causes are the symptom codes namely BSyC. The
resultant BSyC and BRC are prepared for all the critical BMC and BSC’s and listed
(Figure 7 and Table VII).
How to use this MB2M system for the UAE construction companies?
The MB2M along with BMP can be applicable to all kinds of construction plant and
equipment. The construction equipment working at the UAE as discussed in previous
chapters, are subjected to working in different atmospheric conditions. The breakdown
of these plant and equipment happen in construction sites of UAE often.
The construction companies, operating in this region, can adopt to utilize the BMP
technique/model for their fleet. The failure data is the prerequisite for any organization
who deal with equipment. The failure data give an opportunity to maintenance crew on
the analysis of the same and reaching conclusions about the failure patterns existing
with the organization. The operatives/maintenance technicians/maintenance
department/user departments must be given the initial awareness of the
breakdowns and the conventional approach of the breakdown maintenance. They
should be provided with the components and breakdown codes knowledge of BMP.
As per their previous breakdown records (if maintained by the company), if all the
listed codes fit in with their breakdown history, then the same can be used. If there are
newer breakdowns which are not covered, then the newer BMP can be developed.
As BMP gives the clear idea of how to approach and execute the breakdown
maintenance, this system/model will be accepted by the maintenance/operation crew
and can be easily implemented. As described in Figure 8, the flow process describes the
impact of BMP process to the conventional breakdown maintenance flow process.
Various stake holders namely and the process itself adds value addition to the effective
execution of the breakdown maintenance process due to the presence BMP input.
Strategic
approach
245
BIJ
21,2
Engine oil and Coolant oil mixing
Oil Related
Problem
Engine Performance
Problem
246
Oil Cooler
gasket damage
Starting
Trouble
Engine oil level
increased
Coolant oil
colour changed
Engine cylinder
head gasket
Water pump
gasket weak
Water pump
scal cut
Inter cooler
core damage
Engine compression
reduced
Engine head
crack
Emitting smoke with
excessive sound
Inter cooler
core damage
Engine block
crack
Engine head
water gallery
broken
Liner gasket
damaged
Engine cylinder/
Liner crack
Inter cooler
core damage
Engine cylinder
head gasket
Coolant Oil
Excessive
Consumed AA3
Engine Oil and
Coolant Oil
Mixing Mixing A38
Radiator
Coolant Color
Changed A38Sy1
Figure 7.
FTA diagrams for BSyC
and BRC identification
Engine Oil Level
Increased
A38Sy2
Starting Trouble
A38Sy3
Engine
Compression
Reduced A38Sy4
Emitting Smoke
and excessive
noise A38Sy5
Oil Cooler
Gasket Damage
A38R1
Water Pump
Seal Cut A38R3
Engine Cylinder
Head Gasket
Cut A38R6
Engine Block
Crack A38R8
Engine Cylinder
Liner Crack
A38R11
Inter cooler
Core Damage
A38R2
Engine Inner
Gasket Damage
A38R4
Engine Head
Crack A38R7
Engine Head
Water Gallery
Broken A38R9
Engine Cylinder
Head Gasket
A38R12
Inter cooler core
damage A38R10
Inter Cooler
Core Damage
A38R1 3
Water Pump
Gasket Weak
A38R5
The application of this tool will give sufficient knowledge to the entire crew starting
from the operator of the equipment up to the maintenance engineer of the equipment.
The systematic approach of breakdown management will be ensured with all
concerned. The code language will be ruling with the maintenance crew and the easy
diagnosis/fault finding will be an easy and unambiguous approach followed with clear
demand of the resources. The spare parts can be pre planned at the stores as inventory
based on the frequency of various BMP’s happening with sites. The sites which have a
group of equipment can be planned for a limited BMP as the history of failures of these
machines would have been known to all the users at the initial stages itself.
Most of the construction companies working in this region are similar in nature with
the equipment base and the maintenance crew base. The occurrence of failure is also
similar and consistent as per the environmental conditions and the general output
demands from the equipment are always uniform. All of these factors justify the usage
and application of this technique of breakdown management to be useful to the
construction companies in the UAE (Figure 8).
Breakdown sub-code
Breakdown symptoms
Breakdown reasons
A38 Engine oil and coolant A38Sy1 Radiator coolant colour
A38R1
oil mixing
changed
A38Sy2 Engine oil level increased A38R2
A38Sy3 Starting trouble
A38Sy4 Engine compression
reduced
A38Sy5 Emitting smoke with
excessive sound
A38R3
A38R4
A38R5
A38R6
A38R7
A38R8
A38R9
A38R10
A38R11
A38R12
A38R13
Oil cooler gasket
damage
Inter cooler core
damage
Water pump seal cut
Engine liner gasket
damage
Water pump gasket
weak
Engine cylinder head
gasket cut
Engine head crack
Engine block crack
Engine head water
gallery broken
Inter cooler core
damage
Engine cylinder/liner
crack
Engine cylinder head
gasket
Inter cooler core
damage
Conclusions
This article has dealt with the construction plant breakdown analysis and the real-time
reporting of plant history to understand and determine the factors affecting the
breakdown management, overcoming these factors to manage the breakdowns
effectively. During breakdown of construction plant, if we consider the breakdown
itself as a production process, it is always better to identify the wasteful activities, in
other words, lean study of the breakdown process is very much essential. This helps in
identifying the unwanted activities, and as well reengineering of the breakdown
process, by means of a BMP and the entire process called as MB2M which will keep the
entire crew ready with required resources including spares, space, technicians, and
other essential items.
With the BMP and MB2M in place, a broken down plant, either at site or at the
repair yard, gets focused attention upon its arrival to the site/workshop with
the breakdown/complaint, wherein a system of activities are performed as planned and
the effective execution of breakdown maintenance is ensured.
MB2M is to make the breakdown analysis more efficient. Generally, for any kind of
breakdown there are main codes, sub-codes, symptom codes and reason codes. For the
breakdown crew to attend to breakdown maintenance, if the reason for the breakdown
is informed or indicated, the approach towards rectifying the breakdown become easy.
The crew gets ready with the right attitude, focus, preparedness as well as related tools
and tackles to attend to the breakdown. The reason codes further denote various
protocol initiatives required for every kind of unique breakdown which will keep the
entire crew ready with the focused breakdown execution.
Strategic
approach
247
Table VII.
BSyC and reason codes
identification from BSC
BIJ
21,2
Malfunctions
reported by
operative/end user
248
Operatives/Site
Mechanics have
confidence to approach
the breakdowns
Fault identified
with
Breakdown
Codes
Yes
Fault Identified?
No
Operators
confidence is
positive with the
BMP in place
Inform Maintenance
Crew
Operator attending
to resolve the
mailfunction
Operative/End User
attempts to restore the
machine function.
The Operator/site
mechanic informs the
exact problem and
the related
BMP
Problem
Identified?
Yes
Any
Replacement of
Parts/spares
required?
Is the
breakdown resolved?
No
All the
resources
covered with
the BMP
Problem
identification is
part of BMP
Process with
codes
Requisition of
Parts/Spares
Yes
No
Parts are part
of the BMP
and sent along
Parts Repaired
Parts Replaced
Receiving the parts
Communications with
Stores
Operation of
Machine Ensured
All the written
procedures and
completed upon BMP
information
Yes
External Agency/
Supplier does trouble
shooting
Parts Replacements
Figure 8.
Breakdown flow process –
modified
To get external
agencies/supplier
support
Advanced
Diognostic
supports
Requirements
Advance Supports
for Repairs Requirements
No
Is the problem
identified?
Yes
Parts Procurement
Parts Replaced
Replacement
Parts Required?
No
As detailed in Table VIII, MB2M has the components like duration/time management;
resources like spare parts, lubricants, machining, technicians with level grading
required, and depending on the complexity of the breakdown senior engineering
skills/management required, etc. When we apply this new technique on the existing
conventional approach of breakdowns we get proposed savings on efficiency level of the
breakdown process and thus it projects a lean study approach on the effective execution
of the breakdown management process.
The main idea is to make the process more efficient by specific criteria codes and
apply those codes to identify and locate/trouble shoot the failures when there is a
breakdown maintenance call. If the specific repair meets these criteria then we go ahead
and execute that particular plan. If not sufficing the adequate criteria (like meeting only
2/5, etc.) and if they are falling short of the verification of codes/confirmations, then a
new MB2M and BMP is created for the new breakdown.
Whenever any breakdown occurs, the crew will get a call from the user/site, etc. and
upon information, they will check the main code of the b/d which is very generic, and
further it will drop down to sub-code which tells the specific area of b/d, then we go to
the symptom codes which speaks about the closer reasoning and further we go to the
reason code which makes us to have an approach on the BMMP according to the
reason code.
A38
Code
Description
Oil cooler gasket
damage
Inter cooler core
damage
Water pump seal
cut
Engine liner
gasket damage
Water pump
gasket weak
Engine cylinder
head gasket cut
Engine head crack
Description
24
16
2
16
2
8
2
A38R12 Engine cylinder
head gasket
A38R13 Inter cooler core
damage
–
8
A
–
–
A
–
–
–
–
–
16
A
A
A
–
A
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
30
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
A
B
B
B
A
B
A
B
A
B
A
Required
Required
Required
Cooler service/coolant
Pumpkit/assy/coolant
“o” ring/liner/Eng. oil/
coolant
Gasket/paste/coolant
Required
Required
Required
Engine head/gasket/
coolant/engine oil
Block assy/valves/seat/
guides
Gallery pipe/gasket/
coolant
Inter cooler service/
coolant
Liner/rings/gasket/
bearing/coolant/engine
oil
Gasket/coolant
Cooler service/coolant
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Gasket/coolant
Required
Required
Work
place
“o” ring/coolant
Hrs Mins SM M AM Spares
Engine block
20
crack
Engine head water 5
gallery broken
A38R10 Inter cooler core
8
damage
A38Sy5 Emitting smoke with A38R11 Engine cylinder/
32
excessive sound
liner crack
A38R7
A38R6
A38R5
A38R4
A38R3
A38R2
A38R1
Code
A38Sy4 Engine compression A38R8
reduced
A38R9
A38Sy3 Starting trouble
A38Sy2 Engine oil level
increased
A38Sy1 Radiator coolant
Engine oil and
coolant oil mixing
colour changed
Code Description
Breakdown sub-code
Modified breakdown maintenance management (MB2M)
Estimated Technician
repair
category/
Breakdown symptoms
Breakdown reasons
time
rate
Strategic
approach
249
Table VIII.
Modified breakdown
maintenance with
resources template
BIJ
21,2
250
When there is a breakdown call on coolant oil excessive consumed, the person ON
CALL checks the local maintenance team, as to whether there is engine oil and coolant
oil mixing and further whether there is any:
.
change of radiator coolant color change appears;
.
has the engine oil level increased;
.
whether there is any starting trouble;
.
whether the compression pressure on the engine is less/reduced; and
.
whether the engine emits smoke with excessive noise?
All these questions if checked and feedback received, if one or all of the reasons are
present with the breakdown, then the crew which attends to the breakdown goes with
the PROTOCOL which includes all the preparedness to back up the rectification process.
References
Ahamed Mohideen, P.B., Ramachandran, M. and Ramasamy Narasimmalu, R. (2011),
“Construction plant breakdown criticality analysis – Part 1: UAE perspective”,
Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 472-489.
Arts, R.H., Knapp, G.M. and Mann, L. Jr (1998), “Some aspects of measuring maintenance
performance in the process industry”, J. Qual. Maint. Eng., Vol. 4, pp. 6-11.
Bashiri, M., Badri, H. and Hejazi, T.H. (2011), “Selecting optimum maintenance strategy by fuzzy
interactive linear assignment method”, Applied Mathematical Modeling, Vol. 35,
pp. 152-164.
Blanchard, B.S. and Fabrycky, W.J. (1998), System Engineering and Analysis, Prentice-Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Blischke, W.R. and Murthy, D.N.P. (2003), Case Studies in Reliability and Maintenance, Wiley,
New York, NY.
Campbell, J.D. and Jardin, A.K.S. (2001), Maintenance Excellence, Marcel Dekker, Inc.,
New York, NY.
Curcuru, G. and Galante, G. (2010), “A Predictive maintenance policy with imperfect monitoring”,
Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 95 No. 9, pp. 989-997.
Etienne-Hamilton, E.C. (1994), “Managing maintenance for zero breakdowns”, Operations
Strategies for Competitive Advantage, Dryden Press, Orlando, FL, pp. 378-421.
Fonseca, D.J. and Knapp, G.M. (2001), “A fuzzy scheme for failure mode screening”, Fuzzy Sets
and Systems, Vol. 121 No. 3, pp. 453-457.
Fredendall, L.D., Patterson, J.W., Kennedy, W.J. and Griffin, T. (1997), “Maintenance: modelling
its strategic impact”, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 440-453.
Gebraeel, N., Lawley, M., Li, R. and Ryan, J. (2005), “Residual-life distributions from component
degradation signals: a Bayesian approach”, IIE Transactions, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 543-557.
Hall, R.A. and Daneshmend, L.K. (2003), “Reliability and maintainability models for mobile
underground haulage equipment”, Canadian Mining & Metallurgical Institute Bulletin,
June, pp. 159-165.
International Atomic Energy Agency (2001), “Reliability assurance programme guidebook for
advanced light water reactors”, printed by the IAEA in Austria.
John, M. (2003), 21st Century Maintenance Organization Part II: The Path Forward, available at:
www.mt-online.com/articles/0303_21st century.cfm
Kececioglu, D. (1991), Reliability Engineering Handbook, Vol. 1, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
NJ.
Kumar, U. and Granholm, S. (1998), “Reliability technique: a powerful tool for mine operators”,
Mining Resource Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 13-28.
Lu, C.J. and Meeker, W.Q. (1993), “Using degradation measures to estimate a time-to-failure
distribution”, Technometrics, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 161-174.
Lu, S., Tu, Y.-C. and Huitian, L. (2007), “Predictive condition-based maintenance for continuously
deteriorating systems”, Quality Reliability Eng. Intl., Vol. 23, pp. 71-81.
Meselhy, K.T., ElMaraghy, W.H. and ElMaraghy, H.A. (2010), “A periodicity metric for assessing
maintenance strategies”, CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, Vol. 3/2,
pp. 135-141.
Mishra, R.C. and Pathak, K. (2002), Maintenance Engineering and Management, Prentice-Hall,
New Delhi.
Mobley, R. (2002), An Introduction to Predictive Maintenance, 2nd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann,
Oxford, October.
Mostafa, S.I. (2004), “Implementation of proactive maintenance in the Egyptian glass company”,
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 107-122.
Parida, A., Chattopadhyay, G. and Kumar, U. (2005), “Multi criteria maintenance performance
measurement: a conceptual model”, Proceedings of the 18th International Congress
COMADEM, Cranfield, UK, 31 August-2 September, pp. 349-356.
Paz, N.M. and Leigh, W. (2004), “Maintenance scheduling: issues, results and research needs”,
International Journal of Operations and Productions Management, Vol. 15, pp. 47-52.
Peter, M., Liliane, P., Ludo, G. and Harry, M. (2010), “Development of maintenance function
performance measurement framework and indicators”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 131 No. 1, pp. 295-302.
Randy, R. and Burl, G. (1988), “Maintenance management concepts in construction equipment
curricula”, Journal of Construction Education, Vol. 3, pp. 102-117.
Rapinder Sawhney, S.K. (2009), “Developing a value stream map to evaluate breakdown
maintenance operations”, International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering,
Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 229-240.
Ricky, S. (2003), Best Maintenance Repair Practices, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Salonen, A. and Deleryd, M. (2011), “Cost of poor maintenance: a concept for maintenance
performance improvement”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 63-73.
Swanson, L. (2001), “Linking maintenance strategies to performance”, Int. J. Production
Economics, Vol. 70 No. 2001, pp. 237-244.
Todinov, M.T. (2006), “Reliability analysis based on the losses from failures”, Risk Analysis,
Vol. 26, pp. 311-335.
Varghese, M.M. (2000), “Latest construction machineries and equipments”, available at: www.
indiaconstruction.com/coverstory
Waeyenbergh, G. and Pintelon, L. (2002), “A framework for maintenance concept development”,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 299-313.
Further reading
Dodson, B. (1994), “Determining the optimum schedule for preventive maintenance”, Quality
Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 667-679.
Strategic
approach
251
BIJ
21,2
252
RNCOS (2010), UAE Construction Industry Outlook, December, available at: www.rncos.com/sea
rch.php
Schonberger, R.J. (1986), World Class Manufacturing: The Lessons of Simplicity Applied, The Free
Press, New York, NY.
About the authors
P.B. Ahamed Mohideen is pursuing research in the field of breakdown maintenance management
on construction plant and equipment. He is a Research Scholar with Birla Institute of Technology
and Science, Pilani, India. Presently, he is working as General Manager with ETA Ascon Group,
a multinational organization located at Dubai. He has been a maintenance professional for the
last 19 years, working with large base of construction plant and equipment, and he participates
in many technical seminars and forums in the region. P.B. Ahamed Mohideen is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: pbahamed@gmail.com
M. Ramachandran is the Founder Director of BITS Pilani, Dubai Campus. He has contributed
a great number of research works on energy management studies. He is associated with many
international journals and has published many papers in this field.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints