You are on page 1of 19

Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering

A SWOT analysis of reliability centered maintenance framework
GAJANAND Gupta Rajesh P Mishra
Article information:
To cite this document:
GAJANAND Gupta Rajesh P Mishra , (2016),"A SWOT analysis of reliability centered maintenance framework", Journal of
Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 22 Iss 2 pp. -
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded on: 15 April 2016, At: 12:01 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document:
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 42 times since 2016*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2016),"Optimal maintenance level of equipment with the multiple components", Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 22 Iss 2 pp. -
(2016),"Representation of replacement rules in the form of a matrix", Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 22
Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT)

Iss 2 pp. -
(2016),"Airline maintenance strategies – in-house vs. outsourced – an optimization approach", Journal of Quality in
Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 22 Iss 2 pp. -

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:402646 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit for more information.
About Emerald
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The authors are left with a problem of how to choose one particular framework from the list of frameworks. A SWOT analysis of reliability centered maintenance framework _______________________________________________________________________________ Abbreviations : RCM : Reliability centered maintenance SWOT : Strengths. preventive. RCM has been one of the most recent strategies in maintenance around the world. organizations employ different strategies and policies to increase productivity and decrease costs. weaknesses. opportunities and threats FMECA : Failure mode effect and criticality analysis FSI : Functionally significant item IRCMA : Intelligent reliability centered maintenance RM : Radical maintenance FMEA : Failure mode and effect analysis PM : Preventive maintenance Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) FFA : Functional failure analysis FFMEA : Function. Failure mode and effect analysis MSI : Maintenance significant items 1. Section 3 presents the elements of RCM frameworks . increase productivity. they cannot afford to make a mistake in selecting a suitable framework. Hence. Maintenance is a policy which is used in production industries to decrease costs. The theory of RCM is the function of the operating system to recognize the consequences of the failure by the failure analysis and system function. 1 . Since RCM implementation is a strategic decision and assumes that managers tend to utilise a framework for implementation. it is an imperative technology in the industry maintenance field that can be functional to improve the equipment availability and reliability and reduce operational and maintenance costs. Around the world. Section 4 enumerates the comparison of elements of RCM frameworks followed by the used methodology and conclusion of paper in section 5 and 6 respectively. and to continue with the global competition. condition-based and proactive maintenance. in this paper. Introduction Along with the increasing expansion of technology and competition among industries. The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 describes a brief literature review of RCM and SWOT analysis. RCM originated in the Airline industry in the 1960s as a systematic process for development and optimization of the maintenance requirements of a physical resource in its operating context to realize its inherent reliability by logically incorporating the maintenance strategies like reactive. A lot of maintenance strategies have been developed during last few years. an effort has been made to overcome the above problem.

He has been found a significant work in literatures (more than 550 research papers) for 2 . (2000) presented the concepts and implementation steps for RCM and improved an existing time-based maintenance program at a local plant in Saudi Arabia. (2000) developed a new framework for RCM Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) implementation in the chemical process industry. SWOT analyse is can generally help to represent a strategic organizational situation and to recognize what information is needed and what decisions are likely to be made at a personal as well as organization level (Krishna and Dugger. 2. Pujadas et al. 2008) and achievements of RCM applications on the overhead lines (Goodfellow. size. Fonseca et al. SWOT analysis SWOT is a straight forward framework that indicates the significance of external and internal forces for the reason of understanding the sources of competitive advantage. Nowlan & Heap (1978) first introduce the RCM concept in 1978 as it refers to a scheduled-maintenance program designed to recognize the inherent reliability capabilities of equipment. Literature Review 2. Dehghanian & Aminifar (2013) proposed a method to adopt the principles of RCM in power distribution systems in the form of a practical RCM framework.1. 1995). SWOT helps to make a decision whether the problems faced by an organization rotate around a need to improve strategy.. (1996) formulated a specialized maintenance decision support system that combines the merits of RCM and FMECA. Penrose et al.2. (2012) applied the concepts of RCM to evaluate the reciprocating compressor. Li & Gao (2010) proposed the concepts and analysis of RCM by considering Radical maintenance (RM) in a petrochemical industry.(1995) applied the fundamental principles of RCM to 15 foundries which were very distinct in terms of type. 2008). SWOT is a logical approach on which every organization should assess its external and internal environments to adopt its strategy (Ghazinoory et al. Reliability centered maintenance Many authors have made attempts for development of RCM concept since 1960. 2000). Fore & Mudavanhu (2011) developed a framework for implementation of an RCM approach in a chipping and sawing mill. 2000) and processed oil & gas industry (Guevara & Souza. Reder et al. FMECA information (Cheng et al. Richet et al. Literature review shows that RCM includes all historical records such as the list of FSI. 2. (2000) introduced the application of RCM techniques for underground distribution systems. Ghazinoory et. Cheng et al. (2000) analysed the opportunities for the application of RCM techniques to overhead electric utility distribution systems. 2011). chemical industry (Fonseca & Knapp. Goodfellow et al. level of technology and geographical location. Gang & Michael (2009) presented condition- based maintenance framework integrated with reliability centered maintenance. This tool helps in recognizing the organization’s current performance (strengths and weaknesses) and the organization’s future (opportunities and threats) by accounting for the factors that exist in the external background. 2000). Liang et al.(1998) emphasized the importance of careful analysis of the reliability of machine components in order to optimize the maintenance program. (2005) applied RCM techniques on electric motors. a need to get better strategy implementation. or both. Chen & Zhang (2012) described the implementation of reliability centered maintenance in China’s nuclear energy field. underground systems (Reder & Flaten. al (2011) published a review paper on SWOT analysis. Al-Ghamdi et al. Nour et al. (2008) proposed a framework for intelligent RCM analysis (IRCMA).

the principal activities of RCM are organized as elements. Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks 5. Elements of RCM frameworks This section represents the elements and their sequence in various existing RCM frameworks in literatures. while most of them were proposed by practitioners or consultants who have developed these frameworks based on their practical experience with different organizations. construction. The elements of the various frameworks available in literatures are shown in Table 1. which represents the order of each element (given row-wise). 3. transportation. Opportunities are the better chances and prologues existing for growth. Comparison of elements of RCM frameworks About 19 frameworks of RCM have been studied. it is necessary that managers/practitioners of different organizations should identify a suitable framework and they cannot afford to make a mistake in the selection process. while most of them are more or less similar. Hence a strategic tool – the SWOT analysis was chosen for analyzing these frameworks and grouped together into three clusters. making strategic decision using SWOT analysis in many areas like manufacturing. which is shows a matrix of numbers. while only a few frameworks are available based on the quantitative analysis of reliability. . quantitative and practical 3 . Among these frameworks. But a greater hurdle in this selection process is the availability of large number of frameworks in the literature. Group B and Group C. electronic. Literature review shows that there is a lack of structured implementation procedure for RCM and a structured implementation process can be one of the success factors for the Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) RCM program in an organization. The structured implementation process is usually represented in the form of a particular framework and a framework can act as a guide and it provides a structured way to achieve its objectives. world class maintenance and lean implementation for making a strategic decision (Mishra et al. IT. as mentioned in the corresponding frameworks (given column-wise).The order of each element represents the sequence of that element in the respective framework. Many authors published a SWOT analysis for the frameworks of total productive maintenance. Based on the definition of each element which is defined by their respective authors in respective framework. Methodology Since implementation of RCM program is a strategic decision. accelerate weakness and stifle opportunities from being exploded. Only the naming and the sequence of elements are different. The repeatable and consistent methodology is one of the most important requirements for the success of RCM implementation. Some of the existing frameworks were proposed by academicians. Weaknesses are the intrinsic deficiencies that cripple growth and survival. Table 1: The elements of various frameworks of RCM 4. namely Group A. strengths refer to intrinsic abilities to compete and grow strong. 2008 & 2014).. oil & gas industries etc. only few frameworks are unique. In all these frameworks. But the frameworks which are given by practitioners or consultants are also qualitative in nature. Threats are externally wielded challenges. which might contain inherent strengths. The advocates of SWOT. 2007. based on their qualitative or theoretical. similar elements compared and clubbed in Table 2.

but if incorporated can provide significant competitive advantage to the organisation. if an element. weaknesses. • Strength: If any RCM framework has a unique element/feature when compared to others. which may not be an important element for RCM implementation. may have same strengths. (2009). Grouping of various frameworks of RCM is shown in Table 3. (2011). then it is considered as the strength for that framework. the strengths.  The second category deals with integrating SWOT with other decision making techniques In this paper. then it is considered as a threat. weaknesses. Rausand (1998). According to Ghazinoory et. approach. then it is considered to be opportunity for other frameworks. 5. Nowlan and Heap (1978). opportunities and threats of each RCM framework. it can provide adequate support for the manager/practitioners in making a better decision of implementing a suitable RCM framework. This study can be used to assess the strengths. Dehghanian et al. SWOT analysis of group A frameworks Group A consists of following nine frameworks. Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) • Weakness: If the common elements of RCM that were identified in comparative analysis are missing in a framework. SWOT analysis for group B frameworks These frameworks are based on purely quantitative reliability and failure analysis and developed by Yu & Zhao (2005). Table 4: SWOT analysis of Group A frameworks 5. opportunities and threats for different frameworks of RCM were identified. Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004). Prabhakar et al. Cheng & Jia (2005). Table 3: Grouping of RCM frameworks Based on these concepts of SWOT analysis. SWOT analysis has been performed for each of the groups mentioned in Table 3. Kianfar et al. respectively. (2013). • Opportunity: In a RCM framework. Niu et al. it was considered logically to perform a SWOT analysis on a group. then it is considered as the weakness for that framework. namely. weaknesses. which may not be an important element for RCM implementation or if it is not directly related to RCM. (2013). (2010). Selvik et al. al (2011) SWOT analysis can be categorized as follows:-  The first category deals with problems in implementation of new technologies within organizations that can be solved by organizing SWOT panel effectively. The SWOT analyses for Group A. (2005). opportunities and threats. the first category of SWOT analysis has been adapted as follows to analyse the RCM frameworks. Group B and Group C are discusses in the following sections. 4 . but if it is not present/implemented can spoil the entire implementation. • Threat: If an element in the framework. Singh & Singh (2010). The SWOT analysis of group A frameworks is shown in Table 4.1. Since the frameworks having common elements.2. Bertling et al.

etc. weaknesses. The strengths. Penrose (2005). B and C. however the lack of knowledge of quantitative reliability analysis is the major drawback for proper understanding of RCM concepts. Conclusion Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) This paper presents a SWOT analysis of various RCM frameworks which exist in literature and extensively used by industries around the globe. Liang& Hu (2012). In these frameworks basically Qualitative analysis is used.3. Despande & Modak (2002).l (2014).  Group B : Based on logical and structured reliability analysis group B frameworks provides the quantitative relationship between system reliability and maintenance effort however these are very Complex. Yssaad et a. opportunities and threats for each of these groups have been successfully identified and presented in the paper. Apart from Quantitative analysis other elements are more or less similar to Group A frameworks. The SWOT analysis of group C frameworks is shown in Table 6. A comparative study was done for these groups involving different RCM frameworks on the basis of the SWOT analysis of each group. The study of RCM frameworks revealed that the approaches followed by different frameworks can be utilized to categorize them into three different groups – Group A. 5 . Group A frameworks involved qualitative RCM approaches.  Group C : These frameworks are used in practice in various industries and are based on qualitative failure analysis and computer aided RCM however these frameworks are also having the lacks of quantitative reliability analysis similar to group A. The SWOT analysis of group B frameworks is shown in Table 5. nuclear power plants. These frameworks can be used to plan & control the maintenance expenses. Group B frameworks were based on a quantitative approach and Group C frameworks employed practical approaches which are majorly used in small scale industries. Table 5: SWOT analysis of Group B frameworks 5. SWOT analysis for group C frameworks These frameworks are based on their practical application in different industries and developed by Srikrishna & Yadav (1996). An extensive study of 19 RCM frameworks has been done to identify the key steps involved in each of these frameworks. The knowledge of strengths and weaknesses of different RCM strategy presented in the paper can help industry specialists to make a choice among different approaches based on the requirements of the industry and resources available. Gabbar& Yamashita (2003). Chen & Zhang (2012). Table 6: SWOT analysis of group C frameworks 6. so these frameworks are more or less similar to Group A frameworks. time consuming and requires a lot of substantial input data. These frameworks provide a proper way to select the appropriate maintenance strategy to reduce the maintenance costs. The findings of each group frameworks as follows:  Group A : These frameworks can be used for planning the preventive maintenance based on continuous improvement.

. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2008. 2008. 35 (3): 591 – 594 5. A. Yadava G. Aminifar F. J. Control Engineering Practice. Rochette R. Knapp G. Springfield. Penrose H. IEEE 2009. W.. Srikrishna S. Dehghanian P. Reliability Engineering and System Safety.... 1996. Flaten D. IEEE 2012... Pujadas W. RCM and data fusion. H. F.. Zhang L. Reliability-centered maintenance study on key parts of reciprocating compressor. 6 . IEEE 2012. Proceeding of IEEE Power Eng. N.. A reliability based maintenance policy: A case study. Soc. 31(1): 241 – 244 6. 2: 3-14... Zhang T. RCM-based motor management. Liang W. 1995. M. Ouellet P. Guevara F. Reliability-Centered Maintenance. Computers Industrial Engineering 1998. Computers Industrial Engineering 1996. Jia X. 93: 784-792 11. 28(2): 761 – 770 10. An expert system for reliability centered maintenance in the chemical industry. Fonseca D.. Beaudoin H.. Reder W. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery2013. Lambert S. Expert Systems with Applications 2000. S. Application of reliability centered maintenance in the foundry sector. Study and application of reliability. M. Gabriel M. Fonseca D. IEEE Latin America Trans. Chen Y. Heap H. S. Expert Systems with Applications 2000. Gang N. 60: 121 – 132 2. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering.. 1: 551–556 17. 1998. Gao J. Chen F. Li D. Lianfang P. 3(7): 1029 – 1034 4. J. 12: 543 – 548 15. Rausand M. Summer Meeting... VA: National Technical Information Service. 2000. Application and development of reliability centered maintenance (RCM) in china’s nuclear energy field. A comprehensive scheme for reliability centered maintenance in power distribution systems – Part I: Methodology.. Fore S. U.. Reliability centered maintenance for distribution underground systems. Nour G. 2005. Cotaina N. C. J. S. 605-611 12. Reilly K. Goodfellow J. Reliability Centered Maintenance applied to power plant auxiliaries. W. Soc. A framework for cost-effective and accurate maintenance combining CBM. 1: 566–569 Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) 7. Rao P. Hu J.. 5. M. 23: 622 –629 13.. Gao S. “Application of RCM for a chipping and sawing mill”. F. 187-190 9. Souza G.. Nowlan F. Applying reliability centered maintenance to overhead electric utility distribution systems. P. An expert system for reliability centered maintenance in the chemical industry. A framework for intelligent reliability centered maintenance analysis. 9(2): 204 – 226 14. Department of Commerce 1978 3. 6(5): 401–407 19.. Knapp G. Mudavanhu T. Design and Technology 2011. RCM application for availability improvement of gas turbines used in combined cycle power stations..centered maintenance considering radical maintenance. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 2010. Reliability centered maintenance. Richet D. 19: 45 – 57 8. Journal of Engineering.. F. Proceeding of IEEE Power Eng. References 1.414 – 448 16. Electrical Insulation Conference and Electrical Manufacturing Expo.. Michael P. Summer Meeting 2000. A reliability centered maintenance strategy for a discrete part manufacturing facility. 19: 45 – 57 18. Cheng Z.

Mishra R. 162-182 7 . 2005.19(5):449–458 22.. 24. National Conference on Advancements and Futuristic Trends in Mechanical and Materials Engineering. 2005 IEEE Transmission & Distribution Conference & Exposition: Asia and Pacific. Maintenance plan based on RCM. Anand G. Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 2007. T.. Chaker A. RCM: Gateway to World Class Maintenance. Balamuralikrishna R. Zhang T. 2011. 20. 20(1):75– 82. opportunities..16(4): 354–366. Yu J. Bertling L. 2010. Strengths. An introduction to total productive maintenance and reliability centered maintenance.. and Safety Engineering.. Management Practice 2008.. opportunities and threats analysis of lean implementation frameworks. International Conference on Quality. Hu J.. P.. Prabhakar D. Bhardwaj A... Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) 27.. 543–548 31. 545– 549. Chen Y. Reliability centered maintenance optimization for power distribution systems.. P. and threats analysis for frameworks of world-class maintenance. Smith A. P. 2005.. Feb. Risk. Pang L. A SWOT analysis of total productive maintenance frameworks’. An Intelligent Reliability Centered Maintenance Analysis System Based on Case-Based Reasoning & Rule-Based Reasoning. Modak J. 605–611. Kianfar A.55: 108–115 34. Int. Mishra R. Niu G. 96(2): 324–331. (2003). Reliability Engineering & System Safety. Maintenance. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education 1995. 21... Computer- aided RCM-based plant maintenance management system. Sachdeva A. 2002. A Reliability-Centered Asset Maintenance Method for Assessing the Impact of Maintenance in Power Distribution Systems. A framework for reliability and risk centered maintenance.. 3(1): 51–81. A.. Khiat M.. Gabbar H. 33. Mishra R. Pecht M. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. 221(7) : 1193-1208 37. K. Kianfar F. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems 2014. Selvik J. 2012. 28. and Safety Engineering. Liang W. Butterworth-Heinemann. Shimada Y. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research 2013. Allan R. Application & development of Reliability-centered Maintenance (RCM) in China’s nuclear energy field.. 1(2). IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS. Singh M. 29. weaknesses. Eriksson R. SWOT analysis: A management tool for initiating new programs in vocational schools.. Raj V. 12 35. A Framework for Cost-effective and Accurate Maintenance Combining CBM RCM and Data Fusion. Chakraborty A Strengths.. 2(5): 56–64. Kodali R. Kodali R. Deshpande V.. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. 36. 19-20. Reliability Engineering & System Safety. 32. IEEE 2009. P. Yssaad B. 2010. 26. Anand G. Reliability.. Application of RCM to a medium scale industry.. Suzuki.77(1):31–43. Plant function deployment via RCM and QFD. Zhao H. 414– 418. Oxford 2004 23. Maintenance. Hinchcliffe G. Reliability. Zhang L. Gupta R.. Risk. weaknesses... Cheng Z. J. International Journal of Lean Enterprise Research 2014. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering.2012. Singh S. 30. Dugger J. 1–4 25. IEEE 2005. International Conference on Quality. Yamashita H. Aven T.. A New Model For Reliability Centered Maintenance In Petroleum Refineries. 2003. Reliability-centered maintenance study on key parts of reciprocating compressor. 252–255.

presenting technical papers. maintenance management. Raouf A. Tech in Mechanical Engineering from ECK Kota. Pilani. His research interests are in the areas of Reliability Engineering. Duffuaa S. International Journal of Industrial Engineering 2000. which he joined in June 2005 after gaining his PhD from Same Institute. Reliability Centered Maintenance Concepts And Applications: A Case Study. Mehr M.. Ghazinoory S.O. specializing in Production Engineering from the NIT Rourkela in May 2011 after completing his B. in June 2009. manufacturing management. Swot methodology: a state-of-the-art review for the past. Journal of Business Economics and Management 2011. Al-Ghamdi A. Rajesh P Mishra started his professional career as a Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering department at BITS. Prof. 8 ... 38. He has published number of papers in international journals and has participated in a number of conferences.D in the Mechanical Engineering Department of Birla Institute of Technology & Science. Pilani. Abdi M. a framework for the future. Presently he is serving as an Assistant Professor Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) Mechanical Engineering Department. His research interests are in the areas of Reliability Engineering and Maintenance Management. He is currently guiding one PhD. 123-132 About the Authors Gajanand Gupta is working as a lecturer and pursuing his Ph..S. 12(1): 24–48 39.Tech). 7.. He earned his Degree of Masters of Technology (M.

Set boundaries and create a 8. Assess failure 3. Partitioning equipments into 4. 6. Rausand. 2. Perform a Failure Modes and updating Effects Analysis (FMEA) . logic tree analysis 7. failure mode and effect analysis can be found. Selecting maintenance intervals Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) for each equipment. system description and requirement for each significant functional block diagram item. data collection 6. Data collection and analysis 6. Decide maintenance tasks 1. System selection and definition functional failure 3. selection of significant maintenance items 6. Determination of maintenance functional block diagram with intervals partitioning of the system under 9. Critical item selection analysis (FMEA) 5. System selection and 5. Selection of maintenance 7. Failure mode and effect 4. Determine functional failures 10. Study preparation 4. System selection and information collection 2. (2003) 6. 5. system functions and functions 4. Smith et al. System Boundary Definition 3. Selection of critical auxiliaries 5. Srikrishnaet al. system boundary definition 3. Identifying items for which no failures applicable and effective task 5. Failure mode effect and 7. System Functions and 2. System Description and 3. Task Selection criticality analysis (FMECA) 7. (1998) Functional Block Diagram 1. selection of maintenance Information Collection periodicity 2. (2003) 4. In-service data collection and 4. Gabbar et al. tasks selection 5. check and validate 3. 4. Implementation significant items of the system 12. Table 1: The elements of various frameworks of RCM 1. 1. (1996) 4. Decide maintenance strategy 2. Deshpande & Modak (2002) object categories. Nowlan and Heap (1978) 1. Treatment of non-critical items 3. Preventive maintenance review comparison analysis 2. the maintenance decision process 1. Logic Tree Analysis 6. Asset assessment program 2. Functional failure analysis (FFA) 5. Penrose (2005) actions 1. Identify significant items. Determine functionally 11. Evaluating maintenance 3. optimize maintenance tasks 2. Establish an age exploration 1.

Objection identification RCM program 2. Identification of functionally when applying different significant items maintenance methods and PM 2. failure mode and interval effect analysis (FFMEA) 7. Identify critical components by order to determine the reliability analysis effectiveness of maintenance 3. (2005) 7. determine ways of function failures 9. RCM logic decision analysis 11. system selection and definition program 3. Cheng & Jia(2005) 9. Identification of maintenance analysis items and modes 5. Study preparation 6. Estimate the resulting Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) composite failure rate 8. Draft and evaluate maintenance 6. Yu & Zhao(2005) 3. Model effect of Preventive 7. Define a failure rate model lubrication tasks. Identification of maintenance 2. Develop component failure rate corrective maintenance 7. 5. (2010) program 1. Perform a logic tree analysis in 2. strategy 3. Formulation of maintenance 12. FMEA 4. Historical maintenance tasks database 6. 5. Compare system reliability 1. Determine tasks for inactive resulting effect on the equipment and. Define and implement different processes. FMECA 10. procedures and strategies for PM specifications 8. determine failures models 1. Retrieval of structure tree of strategies FSI of the similar equipment 10. data collection and analysis 6. critical item selection results 5. Deduce different plans for procedures. Selection of maintenance 1. applying PM and evaluate the 9. reliability for each failure cause 8. Determine servicing and 4. NIU & PECHT (2009) 5. Function. Singh et al. Evaluation of maintenance 4. Set maintenance requirements maintenance (PM) methods on for the system. Combining PM tasks to form a 1. Identify cost effective PM from equipment case base. identification of maintenance 3. mode analysis 6. Implementation of maintenance 2. Program evaluation & cost 4. Identify failure cause by failure tasks for the FMEA. Bertling et al. determination of maintenance intervals . assessing the effects of failure equipment 5. Preliminary classification if 4. Define Reliability model and actions required input data 8. functional failure analysis 7.

Function analysis 2. Critical component 5. 9. Identify maintenance tasks critical equipment 8. Implementation recognition 5. Define ground rules and 3. Criticality analysis or Risk 13. Identifying Likely failure judgment modes 8. Task selection 4. System descriptions and functional block diagram 17. identification of the critical 4.identify 1. Yssaad et al. Prabhakar et al. Dehghanian et al. 7. Uncertainty analysis strategies 6. Feedback and measurement 19. Boundary definition levels of indenture 2. failure mode determination of 6. Failure modes and effect identification analysis 3. PM interval assessments evaluation 4. Implementation 2. (2014) 15. RCM logic . failure rate modelling of critical significant items (MSI) components 2. (2013) presentation of results 1. system boundary identification functional failures 2. Managerial review and 2. FMECA equipment 5. (2012) evaluation and improvement . critical failure mode 8. failure cause specification of 14. PM evaluation of the non. Reliability audits and analysis 7. Apply RCM decision logic 6. (2013) 4. Uncertainty evaluation & 18. System functions and 1. FMEA of FSI 3.continuous re- 16. Feedback . System division and comparison analysis Identification of FSI 10. Selvik & Aven (2011) critical failure modes 1. making 2. Preventive maintenance 3. Maintenance tasks list 9. Make recommendations and 7. Assign maintenance focus 5. PM task assessments 7. Critical equipment failures and levels based on criticality strategies application 6. Construction equipment tree 4. Kianfar & Kianfar (2010) analysis or identify the level of 1. System boundary definition maintenance strategy 3. Function failure & effect assumptions analysis 3. Comparison analysis of package final maintenance maintenance tasks program 8. Lianget al. System selection and FSI information collection 4. outlining possible maintenance 5. load point/ system reliability 3. preventive maintenance 1. Ranking of failure modes critical components Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) 7. Packing of PM tasks 8. Identification of Maintenance 6. Chen & Zhang (2012) 1. Define the system. FMECA on critical equipment program 4.

functions and functional failure FMECA/ FMEA of FSI/Define failure modes for each functional failure/FFMEA/Ident Name of elements 3 6 5 5 4 2 3 3 3 6 5 3 2 5 3 4 ify failure cause by failure mode analysis/Failure cause specification of critical failure modes Tasks selection/ The maintenance decision process/Decide maintenance tasks/ Develop corrective maintenance processes. (2013) Nowlan and Heap (1978) Prabhakar et al (2013) Singh & Singh (2010) Chen & Zhang (2012) Bertling et al (2005) Cheng & Jia (2005) Kianfar et al (2010) Liang & Hu (2012) Yssaad et al (2014) S. Yu & Zhao (2005) Selvik et al (2011) Rausand (1998) Niu et al (2009) Penrose (2005) N o. of elements 6 5 12 7 6 7 10 3 7 10 7 10 8 8 8 4 11 4 9 system boundary definition/ data Collection and analysis/ System 1 2 5 2 2 2 1 5 2 1 1 1 boundary identification/Define system and subsystem boundaries Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) system functions and functions failures/ Assess failure/ Determine functional failures/ Functional 2 3 4 2 4 2 2 3 4 2 2 failure analysis/Define subsystem interface. Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004) Gabbar & Yamashita (2003) Despande & Modak (2002) Srikrishna & yadav (1996) Dehghanian et al. procedures 4 4 7 7 4 7 10 5 5 7 7 8 7 and specifications/ selection of maintenance analysis/Outlining possible maintenance strategies/ Categorize maintenance tasks System selection and information collection/ system 5 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 selection and definition/Asset assessment Logic tree analysis/ 6 RCM logic decision 6 3 6 5 3 4 6 analysis . Authors/ consultants No.

. Rausand (1998) Niu et al (2009) Penrose (2005) No. of elements 6 5 12 7 6 7 10 3 7 10 7 10 8 8 8 4 11 4 9 Implementation/Impl ement maintenance tasks/ Define and implement different 7 11 6 7 10 8 8 strategies for PM/Implementation of maintenance program Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) system description and functional block diagram/ Set boundaries and create 8 1 3 3 1 3 3 a functional block diagram/ system devision/Constructio n equipment tree Selection of critical auxiliaries/ Critical item selection/ 9 critical component 1 4 2 4 4 2 identification/Identif y critical components by reliability analysis Set maintenance requirements for the Name of elements system/ Determination of maintenance 10 5 5 8 7 6 8 3 interval/PM interval assessments / Selection of maintenance periodicity Draft and evaluate maintenance procedures/ 11 Preventive 3 9 8 6 9 2 maintenance analysis / PM task assessments Check and validate/ Feedback and measurement/ Evaluation of maintenance results/ Feedback - continuous re- 12 evaluation and 12 6 7 12 4 9 improvement/ In- service data collection and updating/ Evaluation of the reliability outcomes . Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks Continue. . Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004) Gabbar & Yamashita (2003) Despande & Modak (2002) Srikrishna & yadav (1996) Dehghanian et al. (2013) Nowlan and Heap (1978) Prabhakar et al (2013) Singh & Singh (2010) Chen & Zhang (2012) Bertling et al (2005) Cheng & Jia (2005) Kianfar et al (2010) Liang & Hu (2012) Yssaad et al (2014) Yu & Zhao (2005) Selvik et al (2011) S. Authors/ consultants No.

(2013) Nowlan and Heap (1978) Prabhakar et al (2013) Singh & Singh (2010) Chen & Zhang (2012) Bertling et al (2005) Cheng & Jia (2005) Kianfar et al (2010) Liang & Hu (2012) Yssaad et al (2014) Yu & Zhao (2005) Selvik et al (2011) S. Authors/ consultants No. Rausand (1998) Niu et al (2009) Penrose (2005) No. of elements 6 5 12 7 6 7 10 3 7 10 7 10 8 8 8 4 11 4 9 Selection of significant maintenance items/ Identification of maintenance items and 13 modes/ Identification of 2 3 3 1 4 1 1 MSI/Determine functionally significant Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) items of the system/ Identification of FSI Optimize maintenance tasks/Selection of 14 5 7 10 optimal maintenance strategies Name of elements Critical failure mode 15 4 4 recognition Identifying Likely failure modes/ Failure mode determination of 16 6 5 3 critical components/ Ranking of failure modes load point/ system reliability evaluation/ Reliability audits and 17 1 7 1 analysis / Define Reliability model and required input data cost/benefit analysis and ranking of 18 10 7 9 strategies/ Identify cost effective PM strategy Make recommendations and package final 19 8 8 maintenance program/ Preventive maintenance program Determine tasks for inactive equipment/ 20 4 10 9 6 Treatment of non- critical items . . Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004) Gabbar & Yamashita (2003) Despande & Modak (2002) Srikrishna & yadav (1996) Dehghanian et al. . Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks Continue.

Table 2: Comparison of elements of various RCM frameworks Continue. . of elements 6 5 12 7 6 7 10 3 7 10 7 10 8 8 8 4 11 4 9 Determine servicing 21 6 4 and lubrication tasks/ Packing of PM tasks Criticality analysis/Risk 22 analysis/ Identify the 3 5 level of FSI 23 Study Preparation 1 1 Compare system Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) reliability when Name of elements 24 applying different 9 maintenance methods and PM strategies Failure rate modeling of critical components/ 25 4 6 Define a failure rate model 26 Estimate the resulting 8 composite failure rate Model effect of PM 27 methods on reliability 5 for each failure cause Reliability 28 improvements via 11 maintenance plans 29 Uncertainty analysis 5 Uncertainty evaluation 30 & presentation of 6 results Managerial review and 31 7 judgment Define ground rules and 32 assumptions 2 Establish an age 33 6 exploration program . Rausand (1998) Niu et al (2009) Penrose (2005) No. Authors/ consultants No. (2013) Nowlan and Heap (1978) Prabhakar et al (2013) Singh & Singh (2010) Chen & Zhang (2012) Bertling et al (2005) Cheng & Jia (2005) Kianfar et al (2010) Liang & Hu (2012) Yssaad et al (2014) Yu & Zhao (2005) Selvik et al (2011) S. . Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004) Gabbar & Yamashita (2003) Despande & Modak (2002) Srikrishna & yadav (1996) Dehghanian et al.

(2013). Cheng & Jia RCM approach (2005). Yssaad et al (2014) Group C Srikrishna & yadav (1996). Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) & Hu (2012) nuclear and power plant etc. Despande & Practically applied Modak (2002). Bertling et al (2005). Gabbar & Yamashita (2003). Singh & Singh (2010). Rausand (1998). Theoretical or Qualitative Smith and Hinchcliffe (2004). Niu et al (2009). . Chen & Zhang (2012). Liang industries like small scale. Table 3: Grouping of RCM Frameworks Groups Authors/Consultants Remarks Group A Nowlan and Heap (1978). Kianfar et al (2010). Prabhakar et al (2013) Group B Yu & Zhao (2005). Quantitative RCM approach Dehghanian et al. Selvik et al (2011). frameworks in various Penrose (2005).

Table 4: SWOT analysis of Group A frameworks Strengths Weakness  Widely accepted framework  Limited assessments of risk and  Systematic analysis for planning the uncertainties preventive maintenance of technical systems  Lack of Quantitative reliability analysis  Supports adaptive and dynamic maintenance  Strategies are only rudimentary strategy  Strategies are made on an ad-hoc basis  Provides way to select the appropriate  A process where PMs are only widely maintenance strategy carried out  Team based improvement process  lack of understanding of RCM concepts  Maintenance expenses are planned and by top management controlled  lack of in-house training facilities  Continuous improvement  Contradiction of management activities  establish documented improvement methods  Long time required for implementation  increases the reliability of system by failure  Resistance to daily discipline analysis  Long term process for data collection  Critical items are dealt with a higher priority and failure analysis Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) for maintenance action  how to relate RCM process to cost  Maintenance tasks are directed towards reduction failure and functional degradation  Poor structure to support the RCM  Reduces maintenance costs due to teams and their activities elimination of unnecessary maintenance  The challenge of passion actions Opportunities Threats  RCM process can be directly link to design  Resistance from employees phase of equipment  management may not be easily  Needs to integrate RCM with other convinced continuous improvement programmes  Savings potential not easily seen by  Reduces maintenance tasks for equipments management or machines  Need of highly skilled maintenance  Development of innovative designs for personnel required for implementation maintenance prevention  availability of system failure data  improves safety and reduces accidents  reduces the investment on new equipments as present equipment will be more reliable  changes the attitude of the employees toward continuous improvement  helps maintenance personnel to become multi-skilled  optimize the maintenance procedures of bottleneck operations  Reduces item/equipment replacement  builds teamwork and cooperation among employees .

Table 5: SWOT analysis of Group B frameworks Strengths Weaknesses  Quantitative relationship between  Substantial input data required to support system reliability and maintenance effort the method  Straight forward algorithm for  Need of significant updates of relevant data implementation of RCM bases  Logical and structured reliability analysis  Limited to power distribution industry  Failure rate modelling  Implementation needs expertise  Reduces unexpected breakdowns  Complex and time consuming algorithm  Economic analysis of maintenance tasks  Other weaknesses are more or less similar  Use of standardized components for to group A reliability analysis  Established for preventive maintenance tasks  Other strengths are more or less similar to group A Downloaded by Tulane University At 12:01 15 April 2016 (PT) Opportunities Threats  Feedback systems can produce better  Reliability outcomes after such a complex results analysis  Can be applied in other industries after  Need of highly skilled maintenance simplification of algorithm personnel for reliability analysis  Can be established for other maintenance  Inefficiency in updating of database can strategies also cause the variation/disastrous the results  Other Opportunities are more or less  Other threats are more or less similar to similar to group A group A Table 6: SWOT analysis of group C frameworks Strengths Weaknesses  Practically use of Qualitative failure  Lack of quantitative reliability analysis analysis in various industries  Focused on practical use of RCM  Use of Computer aided RCM approach to individual equipments rather  Other Strengths are more or less similar than entire system to group A  Practical use of RCM approach limited to nuclear plant. power plant or power distribution industries  Other Weaknesses are more or less similar to group A Opportunities Threats  Quantitative analysis approach can also • Threats are more or less similar to Group be used for the same equipment or A industry  Can be utilize for manufacturing or process industries also  Other Opportunities are more or less similar to group A .