Detective Maintenance versus Predictive Maintenance

Detective Maintenance

Detective Maintenance Detective MaintenanceTerrence O'Hanlon

If you were to step into Mr. Peabody's Way-Back machine and be there for the original publication of Reliability-centered Maintenance by Nolan and Heap more than 40 years ago - the pure version- not reinterpreted, there a few BIG ideas that should have been kept "pure" or in their original state.

In my opinion one of these concepts, phrases, approaches, work types, called Predictive Maintenance did NOT originate in Nolan and Heap and has caused massive confusion and may have actually hindered the advance of reliability in many cases.

Nolan and Heap explain so clearly I am not sure why we changed.

Please follow my logic:

Argument 1:

A potential failure (point C on the P-F curve below) is an identifiable physical condition which indicates that a functional failure is imminent

Original P to F Curve Reliability-centered Maintenance [Nowlan and Heap]

Argument 2:

There are essentially only four types of tasks in a scheduled maintenance program that maintenance personnel could be asked to do and the first one to "Inspect an item to detect a potential failure - a potential failure is an identifiable physical condition which indicates that a functional failure is imminent"

If I apply that to modern Vibration Analysis, Infrared Thermal analysis, Ultrasound, Fluid Analysis or any of the other Asset Condition Management technologies - that seems well within their capabilities. To detect a potential failure (an identifiable physical condition) which indicates that a functional failure is definitely going to happen. No prediction, no guessing.

Argument 3:

The definitions

Detect - discover or identify the presence or existence of.

Predict - say or estimate that (a specified thing) will happen in the future or will be a consequence of something.

I would rather detect than predict.

Do you speak Reliability? Do you speak Reliability?

So we started using Asset Condition Management as the term for several reasons:

  • The objectives are much higher per ISO-55001 and aligned to the organizational objectives through line of sight
  • We do not want to simply monitor the condition of the asset - we want to manage the condition of the asset.
  • We think that prediction or predictive sets up unrealistic expectations
  • The term predictive is not found in Nolan and Heap's Reliability Centered Maintenance
  • We want to accomplish more than predicting maintenance

You can follow some of the very interesting LinkedIn discussions that have led to this post here:

No Predictive Maintenance 01

No Predictive Maintenance 02

No Predictive Maintenance 03

No Predictive Maintenance 04

No Predictive Maintenance 05

No Predictive Maintenance 06

No Predictive Maintenance 07 (IoT Version)

No Predictive Maintenance 08 (Bearing version)

No Predictive Maintenance 09 (CEO)

No Predictive Maintenance 10

Michael Whittaker added the point that there are are accurate "predictive" tools for prognostics so I found this description. It is not a topic I am well versed in but I will begin researching

"Progresses in prognostic maintenance technologies offer opportunities to aid the asset owner in optimal maintenance and life cycle decision making, e.g. replacement or life-time extension of physical assets. Using accurate lifetime predictions is critical for ensuring just-in-time maintenance."

Publishers note:

Q : Why do I rally against the words "predictive maintenance?

A1: Because they are simply a marketing term - not a technical term.

A2: Marketing/sales created all kinds of crazy words and concepts around CMMS and EAM in the early days and I just sat and watched. It ended up creating 70%-80% software project failure rates because the context of those words, maintenance approaches and maturity descriptions were not possible. I do not plan to "watch" this time. Digitalization has too much potential for competitive advantage, safety, sustainability, quality, cost, profit, retention etc...

The language. should reflect the reality of the asset owner/operators (customers) - NOT the vendors (sellers).

Terrence O'Hanlon

Upcoming Events

August 9 - August 11 2022

MaximoWorld 2022

View all Events
80% of newsletter subscribers report finding something used to improve their jobs on a regular basis.
Subscribers get exclusive content. Just released...MRO Best Practices Special Report - a $399 value!
Harmonizing PMs

Maintenance reliability is, of course, an essential part of any successful business that wants to remain successful. It includes the three PMs: predictive, preventive and proactive maintenance.

How an Edge IoT Platform Increases Efficiency, Availability and Productivity

Within four years, more than 30 per cent of businesses and organizations will include edge computing in their cloud deployments to address bandwidth bottlenecks, reduce latency, and process data for decision support in real-time.

MaximoWorld 2022

The world's largest conference for IBM Maximo users, IBM Executives, IBM Maximo Partners and Services with Uptime Elements Reliability Framework and Asset Management System is being held Aug 8-11, 2022

6 Signs Your Maintenance Team Needs to Improve Its Safety Culture

When it comes to people and safety in industrial plants, maintenance teams are the ones who are most often in the line of fire and at risk for injury or death.

Making Asset Management Decisions: Caught Between the Push and the Pull

Most senior executives spend years climbing through the operational ranks. In the operational ranks, many transactional decisions are required each day.

Assume the Decision Maker Is Not Stupid to Make Your Communication More Powerful

Many make allowances for decision makers, saying some are “faking it until they make it.” However, this is the wrong default position to take when communicating with decision makers.

Ultrasound for Condition Monitoring and Acoustic Lubrication for Condition-Based Maintenance

With all the hype about acoustic lubrication instruments, you would think these instruments, once turned on, would do the job for you. Far from it!

Maintenance Costs as a Percent of Asset Replacement Value: A Useful Measure?

Someone recently asked for a benchmark for maintenance costs (MC) as a percent of asset replacement value (ARV) for chemical plants, or MC/ARV%.

OEM recommended maintenance plans

One-third of CEO Terrence O'Hanlon's colleagues think so - at least as a starting point. What do you have to say?