Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 56 views

    Afa LT106

    Uploaded by

    Pedro Herrera
    1) The failure report is for a Metso LT106 hydraulic hose that failed after 7 hours of operation. 2) Visual inspection found the hydraulic hose was defective due to poor workmanship as the hose was not pressed firmly enough during assembly. 3) The root cause analysis determined the hose separated early due to not being pressed within factory specifications during original assembly, resulting in hydraulic oil leakage and machine downtime at very low operating hours.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Afa LT106

    Uploaded by

    Pedro Herrera
    56 views2 pages
    1) The failure report is for a Metso LT106 hydraulic hose that failed after 7 hours of operation. 2) Visual inspection found the hydraulic hose was defective due to poor workmanship as the hose was not pressed firmly enough during assembly. 3) The root cause analysis determined the hose separated early due to not being pressed within factory specifications during original assembly, resulting in hydraulic oil leakage and machine downtime at very low operating hours.

    Original Description:

    AFA LOKOTRACK

    Original Title

    AFA LT106

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The failure report is for a Metso LT106 hydraulic hose that failed after 7 hours of operation. 2) Visual inspection found the hydraulic hose was defective due to poor workmanship as the hose was not pressed firmly enough during assembly. 3) The root cause analysis determined the hose separated early due to not being pressed within factory specifications during original assembly, resulting in hydraulic oil leakage and machine downtime at very low operating hours.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    56 views2 pages

    Afa LT106

    Uploaded by

    Pedro Herrera
    1) The failure report is for a Metso LT106 hydraulic hose that failed after 7 hours of operation. 2) Visual inspection found the hydraulic hose was defective due to poor workmanship as the hose was not pressed firmly enough during assembly. 3) The root cause analysis determined the hose separated early due to not being pressed within factory specifications during original assembly, resulting in hydraulic oil leakage and machine downtime at very low operating hours.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT CARLINDO

    1. Reporting Information
    JULY
    AFA Report Date: Failure Report # LT106-11
    14TH,2011
    Warranty Expiration Date: Warranty Claim #

    2. Failure Summary
    PRIME PRODUCT
    Model: LT106 Serial Number: 76309
    Product Family: METSO General Arrangement # NA
    Service Meter Reading: 7 Service meter unit: X Hours
    PART NUMBER
    Part Hours: 7 Failure Date: JUNE 29TH,2011
    Group Number: MM0282649 Descr: PIPING ENGINE MODULE
    Part Number: N44450652 Descr: HYDRAULIC HOSE
    FAILURE DESCRIPTION
    Number of Failures in Number of Failures on
    1 1
    Dealer Population: Same Machine:
    Failure Description: HYDRAULIC OIL LEAKAGE

    3. Visual Inspection
    Picture 1: HYDRAULIC HOSE DEFECTIVE PRESS- WORKMANSHIP DEFECT

    Page 1 of 2
    FAILURE ANALYSIS REPORT CARLINDO
    4. Background Information / Maintenance History
    APPLICATION / OPERATION ENVIRONMENT:
    (If necessary, add pictures from job site)

    CRUSHING MATERIAL
    PREVIOUS MAINTENANCE:
    (If necessary, add maintenance records)

    TOO LOW SMU – PROBLEM OCURRED WHILE PERFORMING THE DELIVERY


    INSPECTION

    5. Contamination
    PARTICLES FOUND & SOS RESULTS
    (If necessary, add pictures and indicate location where particles were found)
    NOT FOUND PARTICLES ANS SOS WERE NOT TAKEN SINCE MACHINE SMU WAS TOO
    LOW. LOW SMU

    6. Time Line / Events Sequence


    Construct the Time Line based on facts shown above.
    The last highest number is the most probable root cause of failure.

    HOSE WAS NOT PRESSED ENOUGH TO MAINTAIN IT IN POSITION –


    4
    MATERIAL DOES NOT SHOW EVIDENCE OF PRESSURE.
    HOSE DISCONNECTED FROM THE STEM. NO SIGNS OF HIT OR EXTERNAL
    3
    DAMAGE
    EXCESSIVE OIL LEAKAGE
    2

    1 MACHINE DOWN

    7. Root Cause/Conclusion

    ROOT CAUSE/CONCLUSION

    HOSE WAS NOT PRESSED WITHIN FACTORY


    Suspected Root Cause: SPECIFICATIONS CAUSING EARLY SEPARATION AND
    MACHINE DOWN AT VERY LOW HOURS.

    NEW 4 HOSES WERE ASSEMBLED LOCALLY AND


    Conclusions and/or
    INSTALLED IN THE MACHINE. THEY WORKED FINE.
    Recommendations:
    JULY
    Completed by: O.GONZALEZ Date:
    14TH,2011

    Page 2 of 2

    You might also like