Productivity Monitoring & Resource Leveling Problem Statement:

Lack of effective performance monitoring benchmarks for deployed Plant & Machinery No robust methodology to capture LIVE data from deployed equipment for getting usage statistics Manual and experience based levelling of resource done till date; need to develop scientific approach for assisting in decision making for resource levelling No procedure for optimising Resource Costs across the organization

Proposal:-New technologies in use for capturing LIVE data from equipment to generate Productivity Reports
Use of new technologies particularly that can be logged and cross verified with the test reports of the vendors of various auxiliaries is strongly recommended*. I have been involved in Performance Guarantee Test of Paras Thermal Power Station 2x250 MW where our team carried our similar task. Multiple auxiliaries operate in sync with their Stand-by ready to be switched over; the operation should ideally be handed over to stand-by at specific cutoff point which could be excessive vibration, high axial movement of shaft of the main rotor, high temperature of winding, inadequate pressure (suction or discharge) etc. Productivity suffers mainly because of untimely handover or operator bypassing some of the tripping points. In the absence or lack of proper Control and Instrumentation systems the performance trend of major machineries cannot be traced back to ideal condition operation which leads to frequent deviation often un-noticed. Use of probes measuring Vibrations, RPM, Temperature or limit switches for parts movements which can be interfaced with HMI Logger for comparing it with the vendor supplied data can help in identifying the process disturbing the sync. Manual approaches fail to identify internal faults, in a case I encountered at site a faulty pump (inadequate rpm) was assumed to causing problem because of faulty lubrication filter on analyzing vibration pattern the reason was found to be mismatch in gear-profiles. Installation of instrumentation package along with HMI would be a permanent solution. It will help in performance recording which could be shared with other suppliers to avoid foreseen breakdowns. It will also assist in scheduling of machines both for operation and maintenance and impart flexibility to plant operator. Most HMIs generate daily performance report of selected probes/points which can be compared by supervisors of respective sections to judge machines performance. This option could cost somewhere nearby 1-1.5 crore Rs. (depending on layout and complexity of Plant) and could take near 1 Month for full installation including shutdown of a few days. Other option could be deploying a temporary setup for measuring performance over a small period of 15-20 days making necessary correction and repeating the process year-on-year. Complete erection and commissioning of 150 Probes (Temp/Press/Vib) will take around 7-10 days given mounting are available and external agency (like M/s Entech Ltd or M/s Chemin C&I) has to be hired to add precision into the performance recording to fine tune machines at optimum level. This exercise could cost around 4-5 Lakh Rupee. * ( Due to lack in clarity of problem location i.e. Shop Floor/ Project Site/ I am assuming major auxiliaries to lie in the category of Industrial pumps, reservoirs, pressure receivers, filters/coolant- oil/water/lubricant, Drill/Geared jobs etc. which mostly lead to process tripping) Neeraj Partety 207/49