Other than throughput analysis BlockSim can be used for modelling

1. Maintenance-induced Failures during the Scheduled Maintenance of a Component Using

Reliability Block Diagrams (RBDs)
2. Planning Just-In-Time Ordering of Spare Parts
3. Optimum Preventive Maintenance Replacement Time
4. Analysis and Modelling of Grouped and Opportunistic Preventive Maintenance
5. Analysing Excess System Downtime through System Modelling:
6. Effect of Inspection interval on system availability: (Blocksim)
7. Reliability Importance Measures of Components in a Complex System - Identifying the 20%
in the 80/20 Rule.
8. Using Cost Optimization Reliability Allocation Analysis to Set Component Specifications
9. Effect of Common cause failure on system reliability and treating same with fault tree
analysis

https://www.weibull.com/hotwire/issue174/hottopics174.htm
Example-1: Maintenance-induced Failures during the Scheduled Maintenance of a Component
Using Reliability Block Diagrams (RBDs)
Scenario-1: When motor or pump return from workshop after servicing – it is noticed that either
bearing temp. Has increased or vibration is increased in either unit:
Either this is due to fitment error, poor part or poor workmanship.

1st Analyse without maintenance induced failure blocks like below:

2nd Analyse with maintenance induced failure blocks like below:

We use the PM Timer block: to keep track of when the lift is down for scheduled maintenance.
We use the PM Failure block: to model the chance of a maintenance-induced failure during
scheduled maintenance of the lift.
Result:
1st Scenario 2nd Scenario
Availability .98 .98
Downtime 692.61 Hrs 776 Hrs
Crew Cost 20500 KWD 24000 KWD
Part Cost 20600 KWD 25000 KWD
Using BlockSim 6 for Planning Just-In-Time Ordering of Spare Parts (weibull.com)
Example-2: Planning Just-In-Time Ordering of Spare Parts
In order to evaluate an inventory strategy, we need to consider the costs of maintaining spare parts
in the inventory.
1st- Through BlockSim calculate the nos. of expected failure for each equipment, which give nos. of
required spares in general scenario.
Spares we have option of Limited & Unlimited spares: select limited to design spare policy
Inventory Strategy-1: Schedule restock – i.e. restock every 100 hrs
Inventory Strategy-2: Restock as needed – i.e. restock when stock drop down to zero
Inventory Strategy-3: Emergency spare provision – i.e. restock when equipment has failed.
Result: System
Strategy Inventory Carrying Cost System Availability
S-1 200 kwd 99.96
S-2 100 kwd 99.96
S-3 500 kwd 98.56

Example-3: Optimum Preventive Maintenance Replacement Time

First determine whether preventive replacement is appropriate; if it is, then the next task is to
identify the best time to replace the component.
For an equipment with multiple component having different PM plan, this technique can be applied,
as it is cheaper & efficient to perform PM in cluster:
1st – Planned & unplanned cost to be mentioned – in Block properties small symbol
2nd – We have three options i.e. Calculate Individual ORT, Calculate ORT for selected components,
Calculate ORT in Cluster
Result:

Example-4: Analysis and Modelling of Grouped and Opportunistic Preventive Maintenance

The purpose of grouped and opportunistic preventive maintenance is to take advantage of the
resources, efforts and time already dedicated to the maintenance of another part in the system in
order to cut cost.
Strategy 1: Perform preventive replacements for parts X upon a fixed time interval calculated based
on the component's optimum replacement time.
Strategy 2: Perform PM on equipment X whenever any other part fails
Strategy 3: Perform preventive maintenance on equipment X when entire system is down.

Like for Oil Well ESP pumps & its Generator system, we can fit above scenarios.
Result:
Total
Total Number of Total System
Total Number of Corrective /
Maintenance Total Parts Corrective Corrective
Preventive Preventive Total Cost
Failures Replacement Replacement
Strategy Replacements Replacement
Trips Downtime
Trips
Strategy 1 $13,009.33 48.28 338.54 62.33 hr 386.82 $198,900.66
Strategy 2 $10,012.47 71.72 41.67 61.70 hr 71.72 $69,546.75
Strategy 3 $9,645.53 87.63 31.53 63.12 hr 87.63 $76,255.71
Other methods:
1- Analysing Excess System Downtime through System Modelling:
We can calculate that what is the Probability that entire Crude Export Pump downtime will
exceed permissible threshold downtime i.e. beyond that point GC’s production will be
affected. (Says 4 Hrs).
Step-1: RBD for Export Pump, after simulation – in simulation result we have RELEVANT
SUMMARIES and in it we have SYSTEM FAILURE EVENT (time to failure & repair distribution)
Step-2: Copy paste data in Weibull folio – Calculate & in QCP select PROBABILITY OF FAILURE
with mission end time as threshold decided.

2- Effect of Inspection interval on system availability: (Blocksim)

Analysing system availability comparing effect of different inspection interval on FFT items
like – Fire Sensor or says PSV’s.
Define Inspection interval in Schedule Task and simulate each frequency scenario.
Risk of item unavailability will increase with increased interval of inspection.

3- Reliability Importance Measures of Components in a Complex System - Identifying the 20%

in the 80/20 Rule
When dealing with repairable systems, the system reliability (and system availability)
depends on the components' failure characteristics, but also on other contributory factors
such as time-to-repair distributions, maintenance practices, crews and spare availabilities,
logistic delays, etc.

For component A, RS FCI = 75.03%. This implies that 75.03% of the times that the system
failed, a component A failure was responsible. Note that the combined RS FCI of A and I is
81.41%. In other words, A and I contributed to about 80% of the system's total downing
failures.

FRED Report
FRED stands for Failure Reporting, Evaluation and Display. This report provides a graphical
demonstration of the maintainability/availability characteristics of the
components/subsystems in a system and helps to identify areas for improvement (i.e.,
better reliability and/or better maintainability).
For the repairable system example, the FRED report is shown next.

The FRED report shows the average availability, the MTBF, the MTTR (mean time to repair) and the
RS FCI values for each component in the system.
https://www.weibull.com/hotwire/issue139/hottopics139.htm
4- Using Cost Optimization Reliability Allocation Analysis to Set Component Specifications
Can be done in Analytical RBD not in Simulation RBD.
Achieving equipment targeted reliability requirement, by improving/allocating the reliability
at component level.

 Current Reliability-reliability of each block at the selected end time.

 Maximum Achievable Reliability-maximum reliability that each block can theoretically reach
 Feasibility-index that represents the difficulty in increasing the block’s reliability (from 0.1 to
9.9) and represents any design complexity, technological limitations, supplier issues, etc.
 Target Reliability-calculated value that shows what the reliability of each block should be in
order to reach the system reliability target.
 Equivalent Parallel Units-calculated value that shows the level of redundancy that would be
required in order to reach the system reliability target without making any changes to the
reliability of the block.

https://www.reliasoft.com/products/blocksim-system-reliability-availability-maintainability-ram-
analysis-software/treating-common-cause-failures-in-fault-trees

5- Effect of Common cause failure on system reliability and treating same with fault tree
analysis
Consider the following example in which Event A could cause both an X Failure (if it happens
along with a B event) and a Y Failure (if it happens along with a C event).

The above example describes a simple common cause failure problem. In this example, the A
event is the common cause. A failure distribution needs to be specified for the A, B and C
events. The events' failure distributions are listed next.

You can use mirrored blocks to indicate that the two A events are actually the same
event and to specify that if event A occurs then Failures X and Y could occur.

The probability of a system level failure occurrence can be found using the Quick
Calculation Pad as follows.
If the two events A in this fault tree example were not mirrored, the results would have
differed, as the following figure shows.