MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT

PROGRAM
FOR
IRRIGATION
INFRASTRUCTURE
 THEORY

Maintenance types:
 Corrective (CM)
 Event driven (repairs)
 Preventive (PM)
 Time driven
 Equipment driven

 Opportunistic
EQUIPMENT FAILURE MODES

 How does an equipment fail?

 Why does it fail?

 Preventive maintenance…
WHY IS PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE
IMPORTANT?

 Reduce equipment downtime

 Reduce environmental and workplace hazards

 To save money
 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE

 Build preventive maintenance scheduler

 Assess potential losses
 Find frequency of failure
 Determine optimal maintenance policy
 Assist in Data Formation and Collection
 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
Seven basic steps to professional maintenance management.

1. Establish scheduling.
2. Break down the facilities into logical parts.
3. Develop an equipment list and assign equipment numbers.
4. Develop and issue preventive maintenance (PM) instructions.
5. Locate and/or develop equipment manuals.
6. Develop a managed inventory.
7. Monitor the program’s effectiveness and make improvements.
 EQUIPMENT DATA
 Equipment type
 Failure type
 Mean time between failure
 Time needed for CM
 Time needed for PM
 PM interval
 Economic loss
 CM cost
 PM cost
 Inventory cost
EQUIPMENT TYPES IN
IRRIGTION SCHEME
 Valves
 Pumps
 Compressor
 TANK
 PIPES
 SPRINKLERS
 MACHINES
 STRUCTURES
FAILURE TYPES
 Fatigue
 Corrosion
 Wear
 Overload
 Contamination
 Misalignment
 DAMAGE
 DEFECTS
NS2

MEAN TIME BETWEEN

FAILURE…

 Log of equipment for particular time period

 Literature / Assumptions-Probability

MTBF
EXPONENTIAL DISTRIBUTION (GRAPH)
Exponential Distribution with MTBF of 100 days
1

P r o b a b ilit y o f F a i l u r e 0.8
0.6321 probabilty
of failure
by the MTBF
0.6

0.4

0.2

00 5 100 15 200 25 30 35 40
0 0 0 0 0 0
Da
ys
 FAILURE
FREQUENCY
Equation:
1 
t  MTBF  ln
 

 1P
P = probability
t= time of failure
MTBF = mean
time between
failure

•Exponential
distribution
for all failures
TIME NEEDED FOR CM & PM

 Why?

 Calculating Labor Costs

 Duration of Job
 Scheduling
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE INTERVAL
(PMI)

Based on MTBF
 High Frequency MTBF – Shorter PM Interval
 Low Frequency MTBF – Longer PM Interval

 Adjust to optimize cost

 Using a ratio of the MTBF

 ECONOMIC LOSS

 Losses occurred from reduced or halted

process flows When CMs is performed

 Equipment with failure that has not

been Repaired
 CM COST
 Economic Loss (EL)

 Labor Costs (LC)

 Inventory Cost (IC)

 CM = EL + LC + IC
 PM COST

 Economic Loss (EL)

 Labor Costs (LC)
 Inventory Cost (IC)

PM Interval (PMI)

 PM = EL + LC + IC
 Per PMI
 INVENTORY COST

 Inventory Cost – Opportunity Cost

 IC  PC  1 i MTBF  PC

 PC = Parts Cost
 i = Interest Rate for investing money
 MTBF in years
 Not Accounted for Currently
 RULES
1. Repair is classified by priority

2. Categories are described by the time

one can afford before there is an
unacceptable loss

3. Preventive maintenance is scheduled

at regularly recurring intervals
 RULES
4. If corrective maintenance occurred
before schedule PM, PM is suspended.
5. Each week corrective
maintenance actions schedule is
planned ahead
6. Preventive maintenance on all major
equipment is performed at
downtime to minimize downtime
 RULES
7. Opportunistic maintenance, equipment
dependencies, and delayed detection
of failure are not considered
8. If there is an online backup of a piece
of equipment determine the rules for
when to switch to it
 PRIORITY CATEGORIES
 Priority categories are established using a
double entry matrix
Consequence of failure
Probability of
subsequent
catastrophic High Medium Low
failure
High 1 2 3
Medium 2 3 4
Low 3 4 5
Levels of Failures for Maintenance Concerns (following Tischuk ,
2002)
 PRIORITY CATEGORIES

 Probability of subsequent catastrophic failure is based on

how often a failure is expected to occur
 Consequences of failures is based on production loss,
environmental hazards, and workplace safety all of
which are ultimately associated with revenue
EQUIPMENT DATA DETERMINATIONS

 Mean time between failure

 Time needed for CM
 Time needed for PM
 PM interval
 Economic loss
 CM cost
 PM cost
 Priority
 MTBF

 Base on Average MTBF for type of equipment

 Higher Probability – Smaller MTBF

 Lower Probability – Larger MTBF

TIME NEEDED FOR CM & PM

 CM
 Assumption Based
 Type of CM for each piece of equipment

 PM
 Assumption Based
 Type of PM for each piece of equipment
 Safety work permits & simplicity of work
PMI
 Ratio of MTBF

 ½ MTBF → 1/80 MTBF

 Were Tested for Optimization

 Done with an infinite work for at no cost.

 ECONOMIC LOSS
 During CM - Cost per time
 Based on Equipment Importance

 Un-repaired Equipment
 Was 0.1% of the EL occurred during CM

 Cost per time x time = Economic loss

 CM & PM COST

 CM Cost
 Simply Cost of the Equipment

 PM Cost
 Based on the Type of Equipment
 Lubrication
 Cleaning a Compressor impeller so vibrations
will be minimized
 PRIORITY

 Used for planning

 CM completed from Priority 1 → 5
 PM completed after CM from Priority 1 → 5

 Delays
 CM is completed at the first of the next week
 PM is rescheduled for exactly seven days later
 PRIORITY (CONT’D)

 If CM performed on equipment, next PM is ignored

 If CM is delayed more than 21 days, it is upgraded

one level.

 After CM equipment is good-as-new.

EQUIPMENT FAILURE
SPREADSHEET
COMPARISON OF THE CM MODELS
CM Models
Years Model # of Workers Total Cost

1 CM Model - No Resource Limitations Infinite $32,670,224

1 CM Model - With Resource Limitations 4 $32,892,092

3 CM Model - No Resource Limitations Infinite $98,026,767

3 CM Model - With Resource Limitations 3 $98,657,573

 1 Year Difference $221,868

 3 Year Difference $630,806

CM & PM MODEL – PMI OPTIMIZATION

 Use of Infinite Labor

 No Labor Cost

 Ran Model with PMI Ranges

 Ranging from ½ → 1/80 the MTBF

 Low Cost??
 PMI OPTIMIZATION – 1
YEAR
PMI Optimization with Infinite Labor

$18,000,000

$16,000,000

$14,000,000

$12,000,000

$10,000,000
Cost

$8,000,000

$6,000,000

$4,000,000

$2,000,000

$0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Fraction of MTBF
 PMI OPTIMIZATION – 3
YEAR
PMI Optimization: 3 Year Basis - No
Resources
$80,000,000

$70,000,000

$60,000,000

$50,000,000
Total Cost

$40,000,000

$30,000,000

$20,000,000

$10,000,000

$-
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
x MTBF
WORKFORCE OPTIMIZATION CM & PM MODEL

 Use the Optimal PMI Found

 Vary the number of workers

 Low Costs??
 CM & PM MODEL (1-YEAR)
CM, EL, PM, & TOTAL COSTS
C M & P M w i t h Resource Limitations - 1
Year

1200000

1000000
800000 CMCost
Cos

600000

400000 PMCost

200000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
# of
Workers
 CM & PM MODEL (3-YEAR)
CM, EL, PM, & TOTAL COSTS
CM and PM Cost vs. # of Workers: 3 Year
Basis
1300000
CM
PM
1200000

1100000
CM & PM Cost

1000000

900000

800000

700000

600000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
# of Workers
VERIFICATION OF NUMBER OF
WORKERS PM & CM MODEL (1
YEAR)
VERIFICATION OF NUMBER OF
WORKERS PM & CM MODEL (3
YEAR)
DOES THE PMI CHANGE BASED ON A
different work force?
PMI Optimization: 1 Year Basis - Resources

$18,000,000

$16,000,000

$14,000,000

$12,000,000

$10,000,000
Cost

$8,000,000

$6,000,000
$4,000,000 PM I - No Labor
PM I - Labor
$2,000,000

$0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Fraction of MTB F
DOES THE PMI CHANGE BASED ON A

different work force?

PMI Optimization: 3 Year Basis -
Resources
$80,000,000

$70,000,000

$60,000,000

$50,000,000
Total Cost

$40,000,000

$30,000,000

$20,000,000
PMI - No Labor
PMI - Labor
$10,000,000

$-
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

x MTBF
 MODEL COMPARISON
All Models
Years Model # of Workers Total Cost
1 CM Model - No Resource Limitations Infinite $32,670,224
1 CM Model - With Resource Limitations 4 $32,892,092
1 PM & CM Model 15 $6,421,160
3 CM Model - No Resource Limitations Infinite $98,026,767
3 CM Model - With Resource Limitations 3 $98,657,573
3 PM & CM Model 22 $23,027,813

 1 Year Saving using PM Model

 $26,470,932
 3 Year Savings using PM Model
 $75,629,760
 CONCLUSIONS
 Easy to see PM significantly reduces Cost
 Best CM Model vs. PM & CM Model
 Savings of $26.5 million for 1 year
 Savings of $75.6 millions for 3 year

 Improvements
 IRRIGATION SCHEME
COMPONENTS- PUMPS
•EN IT COMES TO CENTRIFUGAL PUMP SELECTION PROCESS: CAPACITY, HEAD AND NET POSITIVE SUCTION HEAD (NPSH) ARE CRITICAL
PARAMETERS. THEY FEATURE PROMINENTLY IN THE FOLLOWING GENERAL STEPS OF SELECTING A CENTRIFUGAL PUMP:  
•STEP 1: DETERMINE REQUIRED FLOW RATE
•THE FLOW RATE REFERS TO THE VOLUME OF FLUID PASSING THROUGH A PUMP’S PER UNIT TIME. THIS PARAMETER IS DETERMINED BY
THE PROCESS AND THE NUMBER OF PUMPS TO BE INSTALLED.  
•STEP 2: DETERMINE STATIC HEAD
•THE STATIC HEAD REFERS TO THE DIFFERENCE IN THE ELEVATION OF HIGHEST POINT WHERE YOU WANT TO DELIVER THE WATER AND
THE ELEVATION OF THE WATER SOURCE. AS THE NAME SUGGESTS, STATIC HEAD IS CONSTANT I.E. IT DOES NOT VARY WITH THE SYSTEM
DISCHARGE.  
•STEP 3: DETERMINE FRICTION HEAD
•TO CALCULATE THE LOSS OF HEAD DUE TO FRICTION, YOU WILL NEED TO CONSIDER ALL THE ELEMENTS PRESENT IN THE PIPE SYSTEM
CONNECTED TO THE PUMP: PIPE, FITTINGS, HEAT EXCHANGERS, VALVES... WITH THE RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS OF THESE
ELEMENTS AND THE FLUID CHARACTERISTICS THE FRICTION HEAD IS CALCULATED.  
•STEP 4: DETERMINE TOTAL HEAD
•YOU GET THE TOTAL HEAD BY ADDING THE STATIC HEAD AND FRICTION HEAD.  
•STEP 5: CHOOSE CENTRIFUGAL PUMP
•CENTRIFUGAL PUMP MANUFACTURERS HAVE PUMPS FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES. PUMP CURVES ARE AVAILABLE AS FLOW RATE AGAINST
PUMP HEAD TO HELP YOU CHOOSE AN IMPELLER. USE YOUR CALCULATED VALUES FROM STEP 1 AND STEP 4 TO FIND A SUITABLE PUMP
THROUGH THE PUMP CURVES. CHOOSE THE MOST EFFICIENT OPTION BETWEEN THE POSSIBLE PUMPS AND CHECK ALSO THAT THE NPSH
REQUIRED BY THE PUMP IS LESS THAT THE NPSH AVAILABLE IN THE INSTALLATION TO ENSURE THAT THE LIQUID WILL NOT CAUSE
FAILURE OR CAVITATION IN PUMP. OTHER ASPECTS AS SIZE OF IMPELLER OR POSITION OF DUTY POINT IN THE CURVE SHALL BE
CONSIDERED.