Case Study:

Creation and Application of a Repair

History Database
Written by

T. R. “Rick” Riles
Reliability Group Technician
Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Paper Complex
Crossett, Arkansas

Enteract Home
 The building and use of a Rotating Machinery Repair History Database can
be paramount in making Reliability Centered Maintenance a reality.
The philosophy at our paper manufacturing facility during the 90’s has been increased profitability through
constant vigilance and improvement. The days of resolving our maintenance woes by indiscriminately
throwing money and manpower at them have been over for many years. At our facility the change started
with the Condition Monitoring (CM) program, specifically vibration monitoring which became the corner
stone of the Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) program. We “vigilantly” look for opportunities to
“improve” our performance in both the CM and RCM programs. One of the most important things is to
recognize an opportunity when it exists.

Continued Success or Failure

During the first few years of a reliability program there is usually enough low hanging fruit to justify the
initial expense of the equipment and manpower that is required to administer the program. Documentation
and communication of savings and improved equipment life is key to showing that the initial funding of the
program was the right thing to do but does not ensure the continued support or even the continued existence
of the program. Adding new technologies, manpower, and specialized training cost money and must be a
good business decision. A good way to maintain the support that is needed to further develop a reliability
group is to communicate opportunities for improvement and follow up to ensure that they are completed.
This is a logical step in the transition from data collection to system reliability. Our greatest tool in
recognizing an opportunity is our Rotating Machinery Repair History Database.

You may ask yourself “Why should we create and maintain a Rotating Machinery Repair History
Database? To help you answer this let me ask you a question. Do you know all your opportunities for
improvements?

For those who already have a repair history database as part of their CMMS (computerize maintenance
management system) you may find that your CMMS does a good job of tracking cost of repairs, this is
beneficial in computing ROI, but it writes repair history descriptions to a text file. A text file repair history
is virtually useless because it is too narrow in scope causing you to almost need to know the answer to your
questions before they are even asked. For a broader view into a maintenance program a spreadsheet type
repair history database format is needed.

Sharing Information
With the wide use of computer networking, all kinds of information can be shared with a multitude of
people in all aspects of our respective companies. This information may be in the form of a report, letter or
database data. The more information we have about a subject allows us to make better decisions. Every
decision we make has a cascade effect. It will inevitably impact a decision someone else will have to make.
This being the case, the information you gather, catalogue, and share will help you and others make better
decisions and will improve your credibility.

Control the Future

Early in the life of the Crossett CM program, there was a need to show that the program was working and
the expenses needed to support the program was a good business decision. The program was needed in
order to keep the mill from drowning in the deep dark waters of breakdown maintenance. Also, the past
history of new and innovative programs at Crossett showed us that after several years of generating high

Page 1

Enteract Home Riles Beginning

 ROI these programs were dismantled because their ROI could not be ascertained well enough to justify their
continued existence. The task before us was not easy. Basically we needed to find out what our impact on
the complete maintenance process was. To this end, we set out to quantify and track two simple questions
over time. These questions are “What percent of monitored rotating machinery repairs does the vibration
specialists predict?” and “Where are our opportunities to improve?” To track the answer to these questions
over time we needed to collect data pertinent to them and store it in a form we could sort by categories. We
chose to use one of several available spreadsheet programs for this task.

We shared this data with the respective maintenance superintendents that we reported to and over the next
several years they began asking if we could track and query other data for their use also. With the addition
of the new data it became very obvious that this database was more than a CM tool but was now a very
effective RCM tool. I have read many publications and there are several definitions of RCM and each
need two things to succeed - Quality Assurance and Historical Monitoring. Quality Assurance means we
engineer a system correctly, use quality machinery/parts, install them the right way the first time and
maintain them correctly for optimum efficiency and life. Historical Monitoring is the periodic review of
historical repair and operational data to ascertain if we have good Machinery Reliability or not. If we do
not have good Machinery Reliability we can query the database and focus on the most likely reasons why
we do not.

To create a successful Repair History Database you must know what data
is available and where it can be found.
One of the functions of a CM Program is the collection of baseline data on repaired machinery as soon as it
is repaired. This means we have to know when a machine is repaired within 24 to 48 hours. The reason for
this time frame is that after a short period of time the repair that was made and other data becomes more
difficult to obtain. At Crossett, all completed maintenance schedules for the previous day are routed to the
appropriate Reliability Group member. This allows us to perform a complete baseline on the repairs early
and to communicate with the personnel involved in the repairs. This early communication allows us get the
answer to questions that might not be answered on the completed maintenance schedules. We now can
record in our database a very accurate record of the repair. From a review of information available from all
sources we managed to compile a list of data we thought we needed now or might need in the future. The
types of data are listed below.

1...Date repair was completed

2...CMMS work order number for repair
3...Frequency of normal monitoring in days
4...Was the repair predicted by the condition monitoring
5...Did the repair cause unscheduled production loss
6...Type of work performed (repair, adjustment, inspection)
7...CMMS Area-Station number and name where repair was made
8...Repaired unit type (motor, pump, gearbox, fan, power transmission device, etc.)
9...Repaired unit manufacturer with model number or description
10...Root Cause (sometimes recorded after a root cause analysis)
11...Problem description and repair work performed

The type of data represented by the above questions would later become our database categories. Next, we
defined several of the terms we were going to use. These terms and their definitions are listed below.

1...Monitored (vibration data routinely collected at predetermined intervals)

2...Adjustment (corrections made to operating condition without unit/parts replacement)
3...Inspection (work performed without an adjustment or unit/parts replacement)
(continued on page 3 )

Page 2

Enteract Home Riles Beginning

 4...Repair (complete unit or parts replaced)
5...Predicted (abnormal vibration trend or condition detected, its cause analyzed and findings
reported, CMMS work order written, in time to plan and schedule the repair)
6...Unscheduled Production Loss (any production loss - stoppage or slow-down because of a
repair that was not done during a regularly scheduled shut-down)
7...Root Cause (as determined by RCFA)

Database Structure
To establish the structure of the database within the spreadsheet format we listed all of the data categories
as spreadsheet column headers. A sample of the actual database column header can be seen below.
Date Work Order

Order Number
CAMMS Work

Unscheduled
Prod. Loss
Completed

Type Work
Monitored

Problem
Predicted

UNIT TYPE
AREA-STATION ROOT
and manufacturer, CAUSE Description & Corrective
CAMMS NUMBER & NAME model or size Action

Questioning the Database

Once the database was established all we had to do was extract information by sorting the data by categories
to answer our questions. Examples of some of these questions and their answers are shown below.

Question #1 - What percent of monitored repairs does the Condition Monitoring Program predict?

We sorted the database records by the primary category of Monitored and the sub-category Predicted.
Then we compared the number of predicted repairs to unpredicted repairs on equipment that was monitored.
The result is represented by the graph below.

PERCENT EFFECTIVENESS
Not Predicted
8%

Predicted
92%

Page 3

Enteract Home Riles Beginning

 Question #2 – What comprised the 8% of unpredicted failures?

The database records were sorted by the category Predicted. Below is a partial list of repairs that were
unpredicted and might represent opportunities for improvement. This example may indicate that we need to
use a different technology other than vibration to find the source of the failures. It could also indicate that
we need training on the use of vibration for motor analysis. The point is that further investigation is
required.
Date Work Order

Order Number
CAMMS Work

Unscheduled
Prod. Loss
Completed

Type Work
Monitored

Predicted

UNIT TYPE Problem

AREA-STATION ROOT
and manufacturer, CAUSE Description & Corrective
CAMMS NUMBER & NAME model or size Action
Repair

28-0762 - #3E HD Tower MOTOR, US Motors grounded, installed 8000-

5/30/1998 27247 28 Unknown
Standby Pump To #1 Mill ???? ????, see Robert Rush
Repair

28-0762 - #3E HD Tower MOTOR, US Motors grounded, installed 8000-

9/8/1998 33845 28 Unkown
Standby Pump To #1 Mill ???? ????, see Robert Rush
Repair

32-0547 - #6E HD Tower PUMP, Goulds Caused by pump bearing failure

5/29/1998 24914 28
Pump To #1 Mill 3175M Other (installed pump unit 0777-

Question #3 - Is there any correlation between repairs and unit models?

Sorting the database records by the primary category of Unit Type a new list can be reviewed for answering
this question. The failures listed below were the result of not flushing out the pumps after they were shut
down. The cost of training personnel to flush the pumps is minimal compared to the cost of $4,000 per unit
for replacement of stator and rotor.
Date Work Order

Order Number
CAMMS Work

Unscheduled
Prod. Loss
Completed

Type Work
Monitored

Predicted

UNIT TYPE Problem

AREA-STATION ROOT
and manufacturer, CAUSE Description & Corrective
CAMMS NUMBER & NAME model or size Action
Repair

40-0647 - #1 PM Bentonite PUMP, Moyno A2D-

8/13/1998 31729 56 Operation replace stator & rotor
Supply Pump SSQ-DAA
Repair

40-0648 - Spare Bentonite PUMP, Moyno A2D-

1/16/1998 17927 28 Operation replace stator & rotor
Supply Pump SSQ-DAA
Repair

40-0649 - #2 PM Bentonite PUMP, Moyno A2D-

1/9/1998 17521 28 Operation replace stator & rotor
Supply Pump SSQ-DAA

Page 4

Enteract Home Riles Beginning

 Question #4 - Are there numerous repairs at any one Area-Station?

Sorting the database records by the primary category Area-Station and the sub-category of Unit Type and
reviewing this sorted list we can easily answer this question. This list represents repeating repairs that could
point out that we may not have identified the actual root cause for all of the failures. These failures below
were a result of the pump running 50 rpm faster than design speed for this application. The pulley diameter
had been changed some time after the initial installation increasing the speed of the pump.
Date Work Order

Order Number
CAMMS Work

Unscheduled
Prod. Loss
Completed

Type Work
Monitored

Predicted

UNIT TYPE Problem

AREA-STATION ROOT
and manufacturer, CAUSE Description & Corrective
CAMMS NUMBER & NAME model or size Action
Repair

40-0647 - #1 PM Bentonite PUMP, Moyno A2D-

2/1/1998 N/A 28 Operation replace stator & rotor
Supply Pump SSQ-DAA
Repair

40-0647 - #1 PM Bentonite PUMP, Moyno A2D-

5/30/1998 27069 28 Operation replace stator & rotor
Supply Pump SSQ-DAA
Repair

40-0647 - #1 PM Bentonite PUMP, Moyno A2D-

8/13/1998 31729 56 Operation replace stator & rotor
Supply Pump SSQ-DAA

SUMMARY
The purpose of this paper was to show how a rotating machinery repair history database could be developed
and used to the benefit of CM and RCM Programs. I feel this paper has done this and more. If the
database is correctly structured, consistently maintained and reviewed periodically it will give your CM and
RCM Programs insight into their respective futures. The use of this type of database will facilitate the
continued existence of your reliability effort and will make it easier to secure funding for the addition of
new technologies. The impact of a database of this type is only limited by the availability of data. Should
you need answers to more questions and the data for answering these questions is available all you need do
is add a new category. If it is not available ask “Why not”. The rotating machinery repairs historical
database is only a tool to help you take control of your CM and RCM programs’ futures
and assist in turning your maintenance programs from reactive Break-Down Maintenance into pro-active
Reliability Centered Maintenance.

Page 5

Enteract Home Riles Beginning