A Brief Introduction to Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA)

Introduction

Any large organization employing a large number of physical assets will always try to ensure that
these assets can always perform their intended function as per their user’s requirements in the
present operating context. In other words, they will always try to get their physical assets to be most
reliable. Almost all organizations have understood that in order to ensure the reliability of their
assets performance, they must have effective maintenance programs. Many have also realized, that
to derive the most effective maintenance program would requires the organization to conduct a
Work Identification analysis using a proven approach. Preferably, using reliability centered approach.
In a hugely complex plant which comprises of many different assets or systems, this process may be
costly and if not managed properly, may also consume too many resources. Hence, for some
maintenance organizations undergoing resources constraint condition in a prolonged fire fighting
maintenance environment, it is sometimes difficult to conduct the full and proper work identification
program for all of its assets.

Combating the situation above, our network has been assisting clients around the world by utilizing
two complementary work identification methods that are based on the proven RCM principles. These
methods are known as: Reliability Centered Maintenance 2 (RCM2) and Maintenance Task Analysis
(MTA) method. For more information on RCM2, please refer to the white paper entitled
“Introduction to RCM II” by John Moubray. We highly recommend the reader to read through John’s
paper first before reading this one. The rest of this paper will try to illustrate very briefly on
Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA).

The Differences between MTA & RCM methods

MTA is an alternative Work Identification method, which uses fewer resources and takes less time to
complete. It is not and should not be called an RCM process. The main differences are as follow; In
RCM, the analysis to develop maintenance program is conducted from scratch where as in MTA, the
analyses starts from the current maintenance program already existed or suggested maintenance
program from OEM. Where RCM goes back to deriving the function and functional failure of the asset
from the system / subsystem point of views, MTA only looks at component failures. As such, while
RCM can produce the most comprehensive asset maintenance strategy under any condition (old or
new assets), MTA is most appropriately done only to rationalize or optimize existing maintenance
program. Although effective for some type of equipment the resulting MTA analysis is not and will
not be as comprehensive as the result of RCM analysis.

The table below highlights major differences between RCM & MTA.

www.relogica.com Intro to MTA v1.1 1

 RCM2 MTA
Approach Structured analysis by a group of subject An analysis with participants and a
matter experts led by a facilitator facilitator in a one-on-one or group
forum (preferred)
Application Typically applied to assets with For validating an existing maintenance
significant consequences of failure and program or creating basic program for a
opportunity for reliability improvement, poorly performing asset.
regardless of the current state of the Not desired when asset failure can lead
maintenance program (if it exists) to serious injury, death, or breach of
environmental standards, or if very little
is known about the asset.
Typical participants RCM2 facilitator, Operators, MTA facilitator, Operators, Maintainers
Maintainers, Internal and External
specialists (e.g. vendor)
Facilitator RCM2 Introductory Course, RCM2 RCM2 Introductory Course, RCM2
Preparation Facilitator Course + coaching Facilitator Course, MTA Facilitator
Course + coaching
Task/Recommended Thorough evaluation of technical Evaluation of technical feasibility and
action evaluation feasibility and economic worthiness, basic consideration for economic
including risk considerations and formal worthiness. No formal failure-finding
failure finding-interval calculations. interval calculations.

Scoping guidelines Typically set for 5 to 15 sessions with the Very flexible. Sessions can be scheduled
group, accommodating 100 to 250 as required.
failure modes.
Typical outcomes Written report containing detailed Within EXP, asset hierarchy for the
operating context, equipment alarms system, MTA recommended action
and settings, performance expectations, templates (if possible), MTA
operating environment descriptions, recommended actions for the asset,
back up/standby/protective system and summary of redesign and modifications
functionality, references to drawing/part to equipment/procedures/training.
lists, labeled photographs and drawings,
comprehensive FMEA, detail task
descriptions, summary of redesigns and
modifications to
equipment/procedures/training, other
issues to be resolved (e.g. drawing
errors, parts error, etc.)
Relation to SAE JA-1011 and SAE JA-1012 No applicable standards but uses typical
standards FMEA Work Identification principle
Source: The Aladon Network

Given the above differences, MTA is most often used to confirm and update existing maintenance
program for less critical equipments which have not been reviewed for quite some time. Used in this
context, the purposes of MTA are:

www.relogica.com Intro to MTA v1.1 2

 • To confirm the validity of current maintenance tasks. This means:
o The tasks are based on technically feasible reasons. Or in other words the process tries
to ensure that all maintenance tasks area there to address specific failure modes.
o The tasks are based on “worth doing” reasons. In other words, the cost of doing the
tasks are smaller than the costs of failure it is meant to prevent.
• To identify any new cause of failure (Failure Modes) and update existing maintenance program
with tasks to avoid the possible consequences of the identified failure.
• MTA is also used to review current/existing maintenance programs to ensure that the
determinations of maintenance tasks intervals (tasks frequencies) are based on valid and sound
judgment.

The MTA Process

The MTA process has fewer steps as compared to the RCM-2 Process. Some of the steps are
combined into one step. The process utilizes fewer resources as it is conducted in an interview mode
which can be in a form of group interview or a one-on-one interview with people who are
knowledgeable about the asset. The MTA process can be divided into three phase which is the
following:

Phase-1 MTA Preparation

• Collect the necessary documents such maintenance & operational manuals, PID diagrams and
failure information.
• Develop the operating state of the assets and it includes describing why the asset exists (the
primary function) and the major components and their usage (other functions) for the asset or
system.

Phase-2 Maintenance Task Analysis

• Review of existing maintenance program the tasks and intervals

• Identify the failure modes in relation to each task from the existing maintenance program and
describes the failure effect for each failure modes.
• Define and recommend tasks for each failure modes considering the consequences of each
failure modes and the technical feasibility of the tasks
• Identify any new failure modes, describe its effects and define the right task for the failure
mode.
• The tasks (or action) recommended includes Condition Based Maintenance, Scheduled
Restoration/Discard, Failure Finding, Modification/Redesign and Run to failure (No Scheduled
Maintenance)

www.relogica.com Intro to MTA v1.1 3

 Phase-3 MTA Completion

• Complete the analysis to ensure all existing tasks have been reviewed and all new failure modes
have been properly documented
• Review the analysis by the people who will sign off for implementation. The review is to make
certain that the analysis have covered all about the asset and that assumptions are correctly
made.

Although MTA can be used as an alternative Work identification method to RCM2, it is important for
an organization to understand that the decision to apply MTA must go through a proper decision
process. A Reliability Strategy Selection process can be utilized to assist organization in deciding
which methodology to use. The Reliability Strategy Selection process rely on a number of criteria in
helping organization decide which Work Identification method to use. These criteria include the
criticality ranking of the asset based on its consequences priority number, the level of risks the asset
has on the organization business goals should it fails, the current performance of the asset, the
operational and maintenance knowledge about the asset and the level of documentation pertaining
to the asset knowledge.

The benefits of using MTA are:

1. Increased proactive maintenance activities, particularly on condition maintenance where

potential failures are captured hence maintenance repair work can be plan in advanced
2. Knowledge and important information about the asset from the best maintenance & operation
people are captured and as a result the right decision can be made with regards to repair or
maintenance action for an asset or system
3. Improved understanding of the maintenance tasks and the tasks intervals, which enables easy
monitoring and update for future task effectiveness improvement.
4. Eliminate routine tasks which are non-value added.

Conclusion

Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA) is an asset maintenance strategy optimization method which
utilizes the same principle as RCM2. In the hands of properly trained individuals, MTA is a very
cost-effective method to produce sound and defensible maintenance program within a very short
time frame. Although developed from the principle of RCM, it is not RCM and should not be called
RCM. As it does not comprehensively address all failure risks in assets, it should not be applied to
critical equipments. We do not recommend deploying MTA blindly for all of your assets in the
absence of a proper RCM program. An appropriate selection process with sound logic should be
used to determine which method to use for a selected asset.

www.relogica.com Intro to MTA v1.1 4