RELIABILITY-CENTERED

MAINTENANCE
- An Introduction -

CONTENTS PAGE

1 THE CHANGING WORLD OF MAINTENANCE 1

2 MAINTENANCE AND RCM 3
3 RCM: SEVEN BASIC QUESTIONS 3
3.1 Functions and Performance Standards 3
3.2 Functional Failures 3
3.3 Failure Modes 4
3.4 Failure Effects 4
3.5 Failure Consequences 4
3.6 Proactive Tasks 5
3.7 Default Tasks 6
3.8 The RCM Task Selection Process 6
4 APPLYING THE RCM PROCESS 7
5 WHAT RCM ACHIEVES 8

©
2000
Copyright held by Aladon LLC
1 The Changing World of Maintenance 1
Over the past twenty years, maintenance has changed, per- The Second Generation
haps more so than any other management discipline. The Things changed dramatically during World War II. War-
changes are due to a huge increase in the number and variety time pressures increased the demand for goods of all kinds
of physical assets (plant, equipment and buildings) that must while the supply of industrial manpower dropped sharply.
be maintained throughout the world, much more complex This led to increased mechanization. By the 1950’s ma-
designs, new maintenance techniques and changing views chines of all types were more numerous and more complex.
on maintenance organization and responsibilities. Industry was beginning to depend on them.
Maintenance is also responding to changing expectations. As this dependence grew, downtime came into sharper
These include a rapidly growing awareness of the extent to focus. This led to the idea that equipment failures could and
which equipment failure affects safety and the environment, should be prevented, which led in turn to the concept of
a growing awareness of the connection between maintenance preventive maintenance. In the 1960's, this consisted mainly
and product quality, and increasing pressure to achieve high of equipment overhauls done at fixed intervals.
plant availability and to contain costs. The cost of maintenance also started to rise sharply rela-
The changes are testing attitudes and skills in all branches tive to other operating costs. This led to the growth of mainte-
of industry to the limit. Maintenance people are having to nance planning and control systems. These have helped
adopt completely new ways of thinking and acting, as engi- greatly to bring maintenance under control, and are now an
neers and as managers. At the same time the limitations of established part of the practice of maintenance. Finally, the
maintenance systems are becoming increasingly apparent, amount of capital tied up in fixed assets together with a sharp
no matter how much they are computerized. increase in the cost of that capital led people to start seeking
In the face of this avalanche of change, managers every- ways in which they could maximize the life of the assets.
where are seeking a new approach to maintenance. They want
to avoid the false starts and dead ends that always accom- The Third Generation
pany major upheavals. Instead they seek a strategic frame- Since the mid-seventies, the process of change in industry
work that synthesizes the new developments into a coherent has gathered even greater momentum. The changes can be
pattern, so that they can evaluate them sensibly and apply classified under the headings of new expectations, new
those likely to be of most value to them and their companies. research and new techniques.
This paper describes a philosophy that provides just such
a framework. It is called Reliability-centered Maintenance,
• New expectations: Figure 1 shows how expectations of
maintenance have evolved. Downtime has always affected
or RCM.
the productive capability of physical assets by reducing
If it is applied correctly, RCM transforms the relationships
output, increasing operating costs and interfering with
between the undertakings that use it, their existing physical
customer service. By the 1960's and 1970's, this was al-
assets and the people who operate and maintain those assets.
ready a major concern in the mining, manufacturing and
It also enables new assets to be put into effective service with
transport sectors. The effects of downtime have been
great speed, confidence and precision. The following para-
aggravated by the worldwide move towards just-in-time
graphs provide a brief introduction to RCM, starting with a
inventory management - stock levels in general have been
look at how maintenance has evolved over the past sixty years.
reduced to the point that minor equipment failures can
Since the 1930's, the evolution of maintenance can be
now have a major impact on all sorts of logistic support
traced through three generations. RCM is rapidly becoming
systems. In recent times, the growth of automation has
a cornerstone of the Third Generation, but this generation
meant that reliability and availability have also become
can only be viewed in perspective in the light of the First and
key issues in sectors as diverse as health care, data process-
Second Generations.
ing, telecommunications and building management.
The First Generation
The First Generation covers the period up to World War II. Figure 1
Third Generation:
In those days industry was not very highly mechanized, so Growing expectations
of maintenance • Higher plant availability
downtime did not matter much. This meant that the preven- and reliability
tion of equipment failure was a low high priority in the
• Greater safety
minds of most managers. At the same time, most equipment
• Better product quality
was simple and generally over-designed. This made it reliable
Second Generation: • No damage to the
and easy to repair. As a result, there was environment
• Higher plant availability
no need for systematic maintenance of any First Generation:
• Longer equipment life • Longer equipment life
sort beyond simple cleaning, servicing and • Fix it when it
broke • Lower costs • Greater cost effectiveness
lubrication routines. The need for skills
was also lower than it is today. 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
©
2000
1 ALADON
 Greater automation also means that more and more fail- New techniques
ures affect our ability to sustain satisfactory quality stan- There has been explosive growth in new maintenance con-
dards. This applies as much to standards of service as it does cepts and techniques. Hundreds have been developed over
to product quality. For instance, equipment failures affect the past twenty years, and more are emerging every week.
climate control in buildings and the punctuality of transport The new developments include:
networks as much as they can interfere with the consistent • decision support tools, such as hazard studies, failure
achievement of specified tolerances in manufacturing. modes and effects analyses and expert systems
More and more failures have serious safety or environ-
• new maintenance techniques, such as condition monitor-
mental consequences, at a time when standards in these areas
ing
are rising rapidly. In some parts of the world, the point is ap-
proaching where organizations either conform to society's • designing equipment with a much greater emphasis on
safety and environmental expectations, or they cease to reliability and maintainability
operate. This adds an order of magnitude to our dependence • a major shift in organizational thinking towards partici-
on the integrity of our physical assets – one that goes beyond pation, team-working and flexibility.
cost and becomes a simple matter of organizational survival. As mentioned earlier, a major challenge facing maintenance
At the same time as our dependence on physical assets is people nowadays is not only to learn what these techniques
growing, so too is their cost – to operate and to own. To are, but to decide which are worthwhile and which are not
secure the maximum return on the investment that they in their own organizations. If we make the right choices, it
represent, they must be kept working efficiently for as long is possible to improve asset performance and at the same
as we want them to. Finally, the cost of maintenance itself time contain and even reduce the cost of maintenance. If we
is still rising, in absolute terms and as a proportion of total make the wrong choices, new problems are created while
expenditure. In some industries, it is now the second highest existing problems only get worse.
or even the highest element of operating costs. As a result,
in only thirty years it has moved from almost nowhere to the The challenges facing maintenance
top of the league as a cost control priority. The first industry to confront these challenges systemati-
cally was the commercial aviation industry. A crucial ele-
New research ment of its response was the realization that as much effort
Quite apart from greater expectations, new research is chan- needs to be devoted to ensuring that maintainers are doing
ging many of our most basic beliefs about age and failure. the right job as to ensuring that they are doing the job right.
In particular, it is apparent that there is less and less connec- This realization led in turn to the development of the com-
tion between the operating age of most assets and how likely prehensive decision-making process known within aviation
they are to fail. as MSG3, and outside it as Reliability-centered Mainte-
Figure 2 shows how the earliest view of failure was simply nance, or RCM.
that as things got older, they were more likely to fail. A In nearly every field of organized human endeavour,
growing awareness of ‘infant mortality’ led to widespread RCM is now becoming as fundamental to the responsible
Second Generation belief in the ‘bathtub’ curve. custodianship of physical assets as double-entry bookkeep-
However, Third Generation research has revealed that ing is to the responsible custodianship of financial assets.
not one or two but six failure patterns actually occur in No other comparable technique exists for identifying the
practice. One of the most important conclusions to emerge true, safe minimum of tasks that must be done to preserve the
from this research is a growing realization that although they functions of physical assets, especially in critical or hazard-
may be done exactly as planned, a great many traditionally- ous situations.
derived maintenance tasks achieve nothing, while some are
actively counterproductive and even dangerous. This is
especially true of many tasks done in the name of preventive Third Generation
maintenance. On the other hand, many more maintenance Figure 2:
tasks that are essential to the safe operation of modern, Changing views on
complex industrial systems do not appear in the associated equipment failure
maintenance programs.
In other words, industry in general is
devoting a great deal of attention to doing
maintenance work correctly (doing the job
right), but much more needs to be done to
ensure that the jobs that are being planned First Generation Second Generation
are the jobs that should be planned (doing
the right job).

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

©
2000
ALADON 2
 A growing worldwide recognition of the key role played The RCM process described in Part 3 of this paper com-
by RCM in the formulation of physical asset management plies with this standard. Part 4 discusses how RCM should
strategies – and of the importance of applying RCM cor- be applied and who should apply it, while Part 5 provides a
rectly – led the American Society of Automotive Engineers1 brief summary of what RCM achieves
to publish SAE Standard JA1011: “Evaluation Criteria for Before considering these issues, we first look at the mean-
Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) Processes”. ing of the term ‘maintenance’, and define RCM.

2 Maintenance and RCM 2

From the engineering viewpoint, there are two elements to wants it to do something. In other words, they expect it to fulfil
the management of any physical asset. It must be maintained a specific function or functions. So it follows that when we
and from time to time it may also need to be modified. maintain an asset, the state we wish to preserve must be one
The major dictionaries define maintain as cause to con- in which it continues to do whatever its users want it to do.
tinue (Oxford) or keep in an existing state (Webster). This
suggests that maintenance means preserving something. On
Maintenance: Ensuring that physical assets
the other hand, they agree that to modify something means continue to do what their users want them to do
to change it in some way. The importance of this distinction
What the users want depends on exactly where and how the
is recognized in the RCM decision process. However, we
asset is being used (the operating context). This leads to the
focus on maintenance at this point.
following definition of Reliability-centered Maintenance:
When we set out to maintain something, what is it that we
wish to cause to continue? What is the existing state that we Reliability-centered Maintenance: a process
wish to preserve? used to determine what must be done to ensure
The answer to these questions can be found in the fact that that any physical asset continues to do what its
every physical asset is put into service because someone users want it to do in its present operating context.

3 RCM: Seven Basic Questions 3

The RCM process entails asking seven questions about the • primary functions, which summarize why the asset was
asset or system under review, as follows: acquired in the first place. This category of functions covers
• what are the functions and associated performance issues such as speed, output, carrying or storage capacity,
standards of the asset in its present operating context? product quality and customer service.
• in what ways does it fail to fulfil its functions? • secondary functions, which recognize that every asset is
expected to do more than simply fulfil its primary func-
• what causes each functional failure? tions. Users also have expectations in areas such as safety,
• what happens when each failure occurs? control, containment, comfort, structural integrity, econ-
omy, protection, efficiency of operation, environmental
• in what way does each failure matter? compliance and even the appearance of the asset.
• what can be done to predict or prevent each failure? The users of the assets are usually in the best position by far
• what if a suitable proactive task cannot be found? to know exactly what contribution each asset makes to the
physical and financial well-being of the organization as a
These questions are reviewed in the following paragraphs. whole, so it is essential that they are involved in the RCM
process from the outset.
3.1 Functions and Performance Standards
Before it is possible to apply a process used to determine 3.2 Functional Failures
what must be done to ensure that any physical asset contin- The objectives of maintenance are defined by the functions
ues to do whatever its users want it to do in its present and associated performance expectations of the asset. But
operating context, we need to do two things: how does maintenance achieve these objectives?
• determine what its users want it to do The only occurrence which is likely to stop any asset
• ensure that it can do what its users want to start with. performing to the standard required by its users is some kind
This is why the first step in the RCM process is to define the of failure. This suggests that maintenance achieves its ob-
functions of each asset in its operating context, together with jectives by adopting a suitable approach to the management
the associated desired standards of performance. What users of failure. However, before we can apply a suitable blend of
expect assets to be able to do can be split into two categories: failure management tools, we need to identify what failures
can occur. The RCM process does this at two levels: ©
2000
3 ALADON
 • firstly, by identifying what circumstances amount to a It is these consequences that most strongly influence the
failed state extent to which we try to prevent each failure. In other words,
• then by asking what events can cause the asset to get into if a failure has serious consequences, we are likely to go to
a failed state. great lengths to try to avoid it. On the other hand, if it has
little or no effect, then we may decide to do no routine main-
In the world of RCM, failed states are known as functional
tenance beyond basic cleaning and lubrication.
failures be-cause they occur when an asset is unable to fulfil
A great strength of RCM is that it recognizes that the
a function to a standard of performance which is acceptable
consequences of failures are far more important than their
to the user. In addition to the total inability to function, this
technical characteristics. In fact, it recognizes that the only
definition encompasses partial failures, where the asset still
reason for doing any kind of proactive maintenance is not to
functions but at an unacceptable level of performance (in-
avoid failures per se, but to avoid or at least to reduce the
cluding situations where the asset cannot sustain acceptable
consequences of failure. The RCM process classifies these
levels of quality or accuracy).
consequences into four groups, as follows:
3.3 Failure Modes • Hidden failure consequences: Hidden failures have no
As mentioned in the previous paragraph, once each func- direct impact, but they expose the organization to multiple
tional failure has been identified, the next step is to try to failures with serious, often catastrophic, consequences.
identify all the events which are reasonably likely to cause • Safety and environmental consequences: A failure has
each failed state. These events are known as failure modes. safe-ty consequences if it could injure or kill someone. It
‘Reasonably likely’ failure modes include those that have has environmental consequences if it could breach a corpo-
occurred on the same or similar equipment operating in the rate, national or international environmental standard.
same context, failures that are currently being prevented by
• Operational consequences: A failure has operational con-
existing maintenance regimes, and failures that have not
sequences if it affects production (output, product quality,
happened yet but which are considered to be real possibili-
customer service or operating costs in addition to the
ties in the context in question.
direct cost of repair)
Most traditional lists of failure modes include failures
caused by deterioration or normal wear and tear. However, the • Non-operational consequences: Evident failures that fall
list should also include failures due to human errors (caused into this category affect neither safety nor production, so
by operators or maintainers) and design flaws so that all reas- they involve only the direct cost of repair.
onably likely causes of equipment failure can be identified The RCM process uses these categories as the basis of a
and dealt with appropriately. It is also important to identify strategic framework for maintenance decision-making. By
the cause of each failure in enough detail for it to be possible forcing a structured review of the consequences of each failure
to identify an appropriate failure management policy. mode in terms of the above categories, it integrates the opera-
tional, environmental and safety objectives of the mainte-
3.4 Failure Effects nance function. This helps to bring safety and the environ-
The fourth step in the RCM process entails listing failure ment into the mainstream of maintenance management.
effects, which describe what happens when each failure mode The consequence evaluation process also shifts emphasis
occurs. These descriptions should include all the informa- away from the idea that all failures are bad and must be
tion needed to support the evaluation of the consequences of prevented. In so doing, it focuses attention on the mainte-
the failure, such as: nance activities which have most effect on the performance
• what evidence (if any) that the failure has occurred of the organization, and diverts energy away from those
• in what ways (if any) it poses a threat to safety or the which have little or no effect. It also encourages us to think
environment more broadly about different ways of managing failure,
rather than to concentrate only on failure prevention. Failure
• in what ways (if any) it affects production or operations
management techniques are divided into two categories:
• what physical damage (if any) is caused by the failure
• proactive tasks: these are tasks undertaken before a fail-
• what must be done to repair the failure.
ure occurs, in order to prevent the item from getting into
a failed state. They embrace what is traditionally known as
3.5 Failure Consequences ‘predictive’ and ‘preventive’ maintenance, although we
A detailed analysis of an average industrial undertaking is will see later that RCM uses the terms scheduled restora-
likely to yield between three and ten thousand possible tion, scheduled discard and on-condition maintenance
failure modes. Each of these failures affects the organiza-
tion in some way, but in each case, the effects are different. • default actions: these deal with the failed state, and are
They may affect operations. They may also affect product chosen when it is not possible to identify an effective pro-
quality, customer service, safety or the environment. They active task. Default actions include failure-finding, rede-
will all take time and cost money to repair. sign and run-to-failure.
©
2000
ALADON 4
3.6 Proactive Tasks • pattern A is the well-known bathtub curve. It begins with
Many people still believe that the best way to optimize plant a high incidence of failure (known as infant mortality) fol-
availability is to do some kind of proactive maintenance on lowed by a constant or gradually increasing conditional
a routine basis. Second Generation wisdom suggested that probability of failure, then by a wear-out zone
this should consist of overhauls or component replacements • pattern B shows constant or slowly increasing conditional
at fixed intervals. Figure 3 illustrates the fixed interval view probability of failure, ending in a wear-out zone (the same
of failure. as Figure 3).
• pattern C shows slowly increasing conditional probability

Wear-out
of failure, but there is no identifiable wear-out age.
Conditional
Probability

zone
"LIFE"
of Failure

• pattern D shows low conditional probability of failure

when the item is new or just out of the shop, then a rapid
increase to a constant level
Age • pattern E shows a constant conditional probability of fail-
Figure 3: The traditional view of failure ure at all ages (random failure)
• pattern F starts with high infant mortality, dropping to a con-
Figure 3 is based on the assumption that most items operate stant or slowly decreasing conditional probability of failure.
reliably for a period ‘X’, and then wear out. Classical think- Studies on commercial aircraft showed that 4% of the failures
ing suggests that extensive records about failure will enable conformed to pattern A, 2% to B, 5% to C, 7% to D, 14% to
us to determine this life and so make plans to take preventive E and no fewer than 68% to pattern F. (The number of times
action shortly before the item is due to fail in future. these patterns occur in aircraft is not necessarily the same as
This model is true for certain types of simple equipment, in industry. But there is no doubt that as assets become more
and for some complex items with dominant age-related complex, we see more and more of patterns E and F.)
failure modes. In particular, wear-out characteristics are These findings contradict the belief that there is always a
often found where equipment comes into direct contact with connection between reliability and operating age. This be-
the product. Age-related failures are also often associated lief led to the idea that the more often an item is overhauled,
with fatigue, corrosion, abrasion and evaporation. the less likely it is to fail. Nowadays, this is seldom true.
However, equipment in general is far more complex than Unless there is a dominant age-related failure mode, age
it was thirty years ago. This has led to startling changes in the limits do little or nothing to improve the reliability of com-
patterns of failure, as shown in Figure 4. The graphs show plex items. In fact scheduled overhauls often increase over-
conditional probability of failure against operating age for a all failure rates by introducing infant mortality into other-
variety of electrical and mechanical items. wise stable systems.
An awareness of these facts has led some organizations to
abandon the idea of proactive maintenance altogether. In
fact, this can be the right thing to do for failures with minor
A consequences. But when the failure consequences are signi-
ficant, something must be done to prevent or predict the fail-
ures, or at least to reduce the consequences.
B This brings us back to the question of proactive tasks. As
mentioned earlier, RCM divides proactive tasks into three
categories, as follows:
• scheduled restoration tasks
C
• scheduled discard tasks
• scheduled on-condition tasks.

D Scheduled restoration and scheduled discard tasks

Scheduled restoration entails remanufacturing a component
or overhauling an assembly at or before a specified age limit,
regardless of its condition at the time. Similarly, scheduled
E discard entails discarding an item at or before a specified life
limit, regardless of its condition at the time.
Collectively, these two types of tasks are now generally
F known as preventive maintenance. They used to be by far the
most widely used form of proactive maintenance. However
for the reasons discussed above, they are much less widely
Figure 4: Six patterns of failure used than they were twenty years ago. ©
2000
5 ALADON
 On-condition tasks Whether or not a proactive task is technically feasible is
The continuing need to prevent certain types of failure, and governed by the technical characteristics of the task and of
the growing inability of classical techniques to do so, are the failure that it is meant to prevent. Whether it is worth
behind the growth of new types of failure management. The doing is governed by how well it deals with the conse-
majority of these techniques rely on the fact that most fail- quences of the failure. If a proactive task cannot be found
ures give some warning of the fact that they are about to occur. that is both technically feasible and worth doing, then suit-
These warnings are known as potential failures, and are able default action must be taken. The essence of the task
defined as identifiable physical conditions which indicate selection process is as follows:
that a functional failure is about to occur or is in the process
of occurring. • for hidden failures, a proactive task is worth doing if it re-
The new techniques are used to detect potential failures so duces the risk of the multiple failure associated with that
that action can be taken to reduce or eliminate the conse- function to a tolerably low level. If such a task cannot be
quences which could occur if they were to degenerate into found then a scheduled failure-finding task must be pre-
functional failures. They are called on-condition tasks, and scribed. If a suitable failure-finding task cannot be found,
include all forms of condition-based maintenance, predic- then the secondary default decision is that the item may
tive maintenance and condition monitoring.) have to be redesigned (depending on the consequences of
Used appropriately, on-condition tasks are a very good way the multiple failure).
of managing failures, but they can also be an expensive • for failures with safety or environmental consequences, a
waste of time. RCM enables decisions in this area to be made proactive task is only worth doing if it reduces the risk of
with particular confidence. that failure on its own to a very low level indeed, if it does
not eliminate it altogether. If a task cannot be found that
3.7 Default Actions reduces the risk of the failure to a tolerable level, the item
RCM recognizes three major categories of default action: must be redesigned or the process must be changed.
• failure-finding: Failure-finding entails checking hidden • if the failure has operational consequences, a proactive
functions to find out whether they have failed (as opposed task is only worth doing if the total cost of doing it over
to the on-condition tasks described above, which entail a period of time is less than the cost of the operational
checking if something is failing). The rapid growth in the consequences and the cost of repair over the same period.
use of built-in protective devices means that this category In other words, the task must be justified on economic
of tasks is likely to become as big a maintenance manage- grounds. If it is not justified, the initial default decision
ment issue in the next ten years as condition monitoring is no scheduled maintenance. (If this occurs and the
has been in the last decade. RCM provides powerful, risk- operational consequences are still unacceptable then the
focused rules for establishing whether, how often and by secondary default decision is again redesign).
whom these tasks should be done
• if a failure has non-operational consequences a proactive
• redesign: redesign entails making any one-time change to task is only worth doing if the cost of the task over a period
the built-in capability of a system. This includes modifi- of time is less than the cost of repair over the same period.
cations to hardware and changes to procedures. (Note that So these tasks must also be justified on economic grounds.
the RCM process considers the maintenance requirements If it is not justified, the initial default decision is again no
of each asset before asking whether it is necessary to change scheduled maintenance, and if the repair costs are too high,
the design. This is because the maintenance person who is the secondary default decision is once again redesign.
on duty today has to maintain the asset as it exists today,
not what should be there or what might be there at some This approach means that proactive tasks are only specified
stage in the future. However, if it transpires that an asset for failures that really need them, which in turn leads to
simply cannot deliver the desired performance, RCM substantial reductions in routine workloads. Less routine work
helps to focus redesign efforts on the real problems) also means that the remaining tasks are more likely to be done
properly. This together with the elimination of counterpro-
• no scheduled maintenance: as the name suggests, this ductive tasks leads to more effective maintenance.
default entails making no effort to anticipate or prevent Compare this with the traditional approach to the devel-
failure modes to which it is applied, so those failures are opment of maintenance policies. Traditionally, the mainte-
simply allowed to occur and then repaired. This default is nance requirements of each asset are assessed in terms of its
also called run-to-failure. real or assumed technical characteristics, without consider-
ing the consequences of failure. The resulting schedules are
3.8 The RCM Task Selection Process used for all similar assets, again without considering that
A great strength of RCM is the way it provides precise and different consequences apply in different operating con-
easily understood criteria for deciding which (if any) of the texts. This results in large numbers of schedules that are
proactive tasks is technically feasible in any context, and if wasted, not because they are ‘wrong’ in the technical sense,
© so for deciding how often and by whom they should be done. but because they achieve nothing.
2000
ALADON 6
4 Applying the RCM Process 4
Correctly applied, RCM leads to remarkable improvements Facilitator
in maintenance effectiveness, and often does so surprisingly
quickly. However, as with any fundamental change man-
agement project, RCM is much more likely to succeed if Operations Engineering
Supervisor Supervisor
proper attention is paid to thorough planning, how and by
whom the analysis is performed, auditing and implementa-
tion. These issues are discussed in the following paragraphs
Craftsman
Prioritizing assets and establishing objectives Operator (M and/or E)
Part 5 of this paper explains that RCM can improve organi-
zational performance in a host of different ways, tangible
and intangible. Tangible benefits include greater safety, im- External Specialist (if needed)
(Technical or Process)
proved environmental integrity, improved equipment avail-
ability and reliability, better product quality and customer
Figure 5: A typical RCM review group
service and reduced operating and maintenance costs. In-
tangible benefits include better understanding about how
the equipment works on the part of operators and maintain- The seniority of the group members is less important than
ers, improved teamworking and higher morale. the fact that they should have a thorough knowledge of the
RCM should be applied first to systems where it is likely asset under review. Each group member should also have
to yield the highest returns relative to the effort required in been trained in RCM. The make-up of a typical RCM review
any or all of the above areas. If these systems are not self- group is shown in Figure 5.
evident, it may be necessary to prioritize RCM projects on The use of these groups not only enables management to
a more formal basis. When this has been done, it is then gain access to the knowledge and expertise of each member
essential to plan each project in detail. of the group on a systematic basis, but the members them-
selves learn a great deal about how the asset works.
Planning
The successful application of RCM depends first and per- Facilitators
haps foremost on meticulous planning and preparation. The RCM review groups work under the guidance of highly
key elements of the planning process are as follows: trained specialists in RCM, known as facilitators. The faci-
• Define the scope and boundaries of each project litators are the most important people in the RCM review
• Define and wherever possible quantify the objectives of process. Their role is to ensure that:
each project (now state and desired end state) • the RCM analysis is carried out at the right level, that
• Estimate the amount of time (number of meetings) needed system boundaries are clearly defined, that no important
to review the equipment in each area items are overlooked and that the results of the analysis
• Identify project manager and facilitator(s) are properly recorded
• Identify participants (by title and by name) • RCM is correctly understood and applied by the group
• Plan training for participants and facilitators
• Plan date, time and location of each meeting • the group reaches consensus in a brisk and orderly fash-
• Plan management audits of RCM recommendations ion, while retaining their enthusiasm and commitment
• Plan to implement the recommendations (maintenance • the analysis progresses as planned and finishes on time.
tasks, design changes, changes to operating procedures) Facilitators also work with RCM project managers or spon-
sors to ensure that each analysis is properly planned and
Review groups receives appropriate managerial and logistic support.
We have seen how the RCM process embodies seven basic
questions. In practice, maintenance people simply cannot The outcomes of an RCM analysis
answer all these questions on their own. This is because If it is applied in the manner suggested above, an RCM
many (if not most) of the answers can only be supplied by analysis results in three tangible outcomes, as follows:
production or operations people. This applies especially to
questions concerning functions, desired performance, fail- • schedules to be done by the maintenance department
ure effects and failure consequences. • revised operating procedures for the operators of the asset
For this reason, a review of the maintenance requirements • a list of areas where one-time changes must be made to the
of any asset should be done by small teams that include at design of the asset or the way in which it is operated to deal
least one person from the maintenance function and one with situations where the asset cannot deliver the desired
from the operations function. performance in its current configuration.
©
2000
7 ALADON
 A less tangible but very valuable outcome is that participants Implementation
in the process tend to start functioning much better as multi- Once the RCM review has been audited and approved, the
disciplinary teams after their analyses have been completed. final step is to implement the tasks, procedures and one-time
changes. The revised tasks and procedures must be docu-
Auditing mented in a way that ensures that they will be easily under-
After the review has been completed for each asset, senior stood and performed safely by the people who do the work.
managers with overall responsibility for the equipment must The maintenance tasks are then fed into suitable high-
satisfy themselves that the review is sensible and defensible. and low-frequency maintenance planning and control sys-
This entails deciding whether they agree with the definition tems, while revised operating procedures are usually incor-
of functions and performance standards, the identification porated into standard operating procedure manuals. Propos-
of failure modes and the description of failure effects, the als for modifications are dealt with by the engineering or
assessment of failure consequences and the selection of tasks. project management function in most organizations.

5 What RCM Achieves 5

Desirable as they are, the outcomes listed above should only In addition, if RCM is correctly applied to existing
be seen as a means to an end. Specifically, they should maintenance systems, it reduces the amount of routine
enable the maintenance function to fulfil all the expectations work (in other words, maintenance tasks to be under-
listed in Figure 1 at the beginning of this paper. How they do taken on a cyclic basis) issued in each period, usually by
so is summarized in the following paragraphs. 40% to 70%. On the other hand, if RCM is used to develop
a new maintenance program, the resulting scheduled work-
• Greater safety and environmental integrity: RCM con- load is much lower than if the program is developed by
siders the safety and environmental implications of every traditional methods.
failure mode before considering its effect on operations.
This means that steps are taken to minimize all identifi- • Longer useful life of expensive items, due to a carefully
able equipment-related safety and environmental haz- focused emphasis on the use of on-condition maintenance.
ards, if not eliminate them altogether. By integrating safety
into the mainstream of maintenance decision-making, • A comprehensive database: An RCM review ends with a
RCM also improves attitudes to safety. comprehensive and fully documented record of the main-
tenance requirements of all the significant assets used by
• Improved operating performance (output, product qual- the organization. This makes it possible to adapt to chang-
ity and customer service): RCM recognizes that all types ing circumstances (such as changing shift patterns or new
of maintenance have some value, and provides rules for technology) without having to reconsider all maintenance
deciding which is most suitable in every situation. By policies from scratch. It also enables equipment users to
doing so, it helps ensure that only the most effective forms demonstrate that their maintenance programs are built on
of maintenance are chosen for each asset, and that suitable rational foundations (the audit trail required by more and
action is taken in cases where maintenance cannot help. more regulators). Finally, the information stored on RCM
This much more tightly focused maintenance effort leads worksheets reduces the effects of staff turnover with its
to quantum jumps in the performance of existing assets attendant loss of experience and expertise.
where these are sought. An RCM review of the maintenance requirements of
RCM was developed to help airlines draw up mainte- each asset also provides a much clearer view of the skills
nance programs for new types of aircraft before they enter required to maintain each asset, and for deciding what
service. As a result, it is an ideal way to develop such spares should be held in stock.
programs for new assets, especially complex equipment
for which no historical information is available. This • Greater motivation of individuals, especially people who
saves much of the trial and error that is so often part of the are involved in the review process. This is accompanied
development of new maintenance programs – trial that is by much wider ‘ownership’ of maintenance problems and
time-consuming and frustrating, and error that can be very their solutions. It also means that solutions are more likely
costly. to endure.

• Greater maintenance cost-effectiveness: RCM continu- • Better teamwork: RCM provides a common, easily under-
ally focuses attention on the maintenance activities that stood technical language for everyone who has anything to
have most effect on the performance of the plant. This do with maintenance. This gives maintenance and opera-
helps to ensure that everything spent on maintenance is tions people a better understanding of what maintenance can
spent where it will do the most good. (and cannot) achieve and what must be done to achieve it.
©
2000
ALADON 8
All of these issues are part of the mainstream of maintenance
management, and many are already the target of improve-
ment programs. A major feature of RCM is that it provides
an effective step-by-step framework for tackling all of them
at once, and for involving everyone who has anything to do
with the equipment in the process.
RCM yields results very quickly. In fact, if they are cor-
rectly focused and correctly applied, RCM analyses can pay
for themselves in a matter of months and sometimes even a
matter of weeks. The process transforms both the perceived
maintenance requirements of the physical assets used by the
organization and the way in which the maintenance function
as a whole is perceived. The result is more cost-effective,
more harmonious and much more successful maintenance.

1 International Society of Automotive Engineers: JA1011 - Evaluation

Criteria for Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) Processes:
Warrendale, Pennsylvania, USA: SAE Publications

©
2000
ALADON
9