One of my favorite activities at LinkedIn, is inviting reliability leaders from around the world to stand in enquiry around some of the tricky, multidimensional challenges we face on a day-to-day basis.
There are powerful insights for each of us in this featured discussion around following the maintenance recommendations of the original equipment manufacture [OEM].
The discussion ranged from outright "No" to "If you don't you will go to jail".
Do not expect simple outcomes from this cohort of global reliability knowledge and experience, however; it my hope is that you experience breakthroughs for your reliability journey. Do not worry about what the crowd thinks. Stand on your own two feet and think for yourself like a reliability leader does to get the most from this post.
Here is the original post that started this 360 enquiry on following OEM Maintenance recommendations.
"If included as a deliverable, as part of the project, with the customer willing to pay for the vendor to commit a resource, and include their own maintenance representatives (a technician and a reliability engineer) to work on the project with the vendor then an excellent maintenance program can be designed. Obviously as time goes by other fail modes will occur and the program will be optimized......but as a start point its the best way imo." - Joseph D.
"If the OEM has carried out a proper FMEA on their equipment, then that is your baseline. Then you modify that based on environment and operating experience. And the OEM baseline will likely only consider probability of failure...consequence is all about where and how you use the asset. So you modify based on that too." - Sam G
Reply: " Sam you make great points. Part of the FME(C)A is effects. To monetize the effects to appropriately mitigate the failure process parameters are needed. Also if availability of the materials to repair are unknown the downtime is hard to calculate. If the OEM has used or provided this information then this would be acceptable. It would be awesome if the OEM would do this but because most installations are based on the lowest capital cost and not the lowest lifecycle cost this work if available would be cut. There are exceptions of course." - Rob A
"OEM maintenance guides are sometimes designed to drive consumption of OEM supplied spares and consumables. The best way is to do a proper FMEA and come up with the best strategy." - Kudzai W
"OEM guidelines on Equipment tasks are mostly for reference. Actual Site condition/ Installation/Assembly/ Commissioning/ Equipment component behavior & its deviation on Load, RPM factors/ Process Parameters Deviation/ Defect phenomenon/ Temp/ Environment/ Affect of previous, next M/c / CBM trends & Modifications done during operations, shall be ingredients for devicing right Maintenance Program." -Anoop S
"It's the Law, at least here in Australia... is it suggested that we break the Law?" - Mark T
Reply: "Mark, I am not familiar with laws and compliance to OEM recommended strategies. Can you expand?" - Rob A
"When we haven't enough information from our operational context it is a good starting point that needs to be revised carefully, but the OEM business after the asset is sold is selling as many parts as they can, suggesting to change many spare parts, sometimes unnecessary and providing basic inspection tasks. Once the asset starts to operate, new data comes to analyze and help to redirect the strategy." - Andrés A
"If the OEM themselves are maintenance oriented and understand that customers do not have unlimited spare parts budget. My biggest issue is normally over sold/pushed spares that are not part of an critical FMA." - Jason B
"Only to start. Most OEM's don't provide an FMECA so you're on the hot seat until your first failure. A lot of OEM's don't design their equipment to run 24/7, so their manuals state required maintenance determine in 8 hour intervals 1x a day. Not nearly enough." - Todd B
"OEMs recommendations do not justify enough. Maintenance plans should be site based, not OEM based.I strongly believe that maintenance schedules and plans should be designed according to site specifications.
Maintenance schedules can not be identical across all sites. Maintenance plans should be agreed upon by the maintenance planners and supervisors on site, because they fully understand and know how their equipment is being utilised, how it is failing, and its reliability.
Therefore you might find that OEM maintenance plans may lead to over maintenance of equipment or under maintenance. Each and every site should have its own discreet maintenance plan on their equipment, thus, maintenance plans should be site based not OEM based." - Avery C
Reply: "It isn’t to say the OEM maintenance plan is incorrect, but I would say your point is true insofar as engineers require to be cognizant of the Operating Context as a potential modifier to the plan."
"Be careful of your terminology since scheduling is all well and good but a fruitless endeavor if planning of appropriate tasks hasn’t been justified prior to the schedule being locked down. E.g. What Inspection, Test & PM tasks are required (the planning) and when/how often (the scheduling). So that takes me to the point - Yes, the schedules across sites could well be identical but the plan may not be.
Regarding your last point, what you’re maybe considering is OEM “equipment” installed into packages where there’s a larger boundary of ancillaries to consider. This would form a different plan, but it wouldn’t change the OEM requirement particularly during the warranty period, in my opinion anyway. And it’s that level where site considerations and more of a bespoke or integrated plan would sit." - Steve B
Reply: "Steve B, I want to discuss some points here with you sir. Maintenance plan illustrates what needs to be done, like say preventive maintenance plan. But a maintenance plan is incomplete if it does not incorporate a maintenance schedule, right. So OEMs provide maintenance plan (like what tasks to carry out during maintenance) to a customer when one purchases an equipment.
This is where I disagree with OEM maintenance plans, because they are not fair. On their own, they do not justify proper Reliability Centered Maintenance because they do not take into account important notes like MTTF. Infact they do not consider most KPIs other than PM/CM ratio.
This is why I am saying, maintenance plan and their schedules should be site based. It is the planner and the Supervisors who should design a maintenance plan and schedule that is specific to their equipment and site. Basing on how they want to achieve their KPIs.
I would like to hear your side sir. Am learning." - Avery C
Reply: "Hi Avery C.
Happy to discuss… first, there’s an important distinction to be made between intervals and scheduling. I think you’re referring to establishing intervals on the plan which would be correct.
Second point, true, they could “justify” proper RCM if a defined relationship is made between OEM tasks and the Failure Mode or specific Mechanism being mitigated or revealed via the task. But bear in mind the OEM has typically considered those but simplified into tasking only. So I would say it is partially considered/satisfied, but the only way to really understand it is via an evolution in maturity of the RCM programme which of course would involve FMECA and using proven in use data and information (including realised failures) gleaned from equipment in operation.
And yes, true, any maintenance plan, OEM or otherwise should be appended with site specific info and insights." - Steve B
Reply: "Steve B, this is true. I am grateful I has this opportunity to discuss and learn a lot from you sir. This discussion was interesting. Thank you" - Avery C
As a start in the absence of any in-house analysis?...for now, but not as a short-term-that-becomes-permanent solution.
The OEM may be prone to have things in place to prevent warranty-type claims.
If that leads to frequencies of over maintaining, it also opens up the possibility of self-induced issues by disturbing systems unnecessarily." -David N
"As Farizan R mentioned, where warranty is involved, as was in our case, it was us the vendor/manufacturer who would install and perform maintenance based on the manufacturer's specifications.However, based on working condition, environmental aspects and exposure, availability of lubricants, spares etc...it was necessary to fine-tune the maintenance plan once the warranty was over." -Niaz A
Reply: "Your scenario is very typical for a vendor install/managed asset. Not many manufacturers or vendors will sell you something and let you install it operate and maintain and provide warranty with the exception of Mobile fleet.
We are along way from OEM recommended strategies.
Warranty is much different than performance guarantees. And OEM recommendations without processing information is far from ideal.
The answer to the original question is not a cookie cut . We have to have the wisdom to know what is appropriate.
Reliability acumen will provide the right path for the convoluted process of asset strategies." - Rob A
"In my opinion, the OEM recommendation help you make a good autonomous maintenance program, for make a complete maintenance plan we need to complement with other reliability strategies" - Rodrigo B
"Great comments, may I also add that our OEM's may be situated in ideas conditions and environments and therefore are not aware of how some of these extreme elements would affect the performance of their equipment. To run their products at -35C will perform differently than at +30C; or at an altitude of +3000 meters compared to running it at sea level. These factors will definitely affect the maintenance requirements of their equipment and a good maintenance program should be established once these elements are considered. Of course their are others but these are the ones that I have experienced" - William R
"It is a good place to begin, however once good maintenance data is present then the OEM data will could be changed based on this new data." - Ricky S
Reply: "OEMs usually have a wealth of experience in respect of their specific equipment and design parameters, and this provides a very good foundation on which to base the variations that will make the equipment work better, taking all the individual operating conditions into account. OEMs often have to factor in the lowest common denominators." - Dave W
"I fully agree that as a starting point for a new physical asset maintenance program. Then it will be the responsibility of the company that operates it to improve the maintenance program by collecting its own information and that of companies that have the same asset.
Expanding on the above, I assume that the company that purchased the new physical asset did not do it just for price, but carried out an exhaustive process based on standards, market consultations, visits to facilities, dialog with OEM engineering, failure modes, etc." - Diego C
"True, OEMs maintenance plans and recommended spares are a good starting point, especially until asset is covered under warranty. However users need to optimise the maintenance plans to suit their specific requirements. Usually maintenance recommendations from OEMs do not cover risk based maintenance strategy and this is something asset users need to work on to maximise asset life cycle." - Vivek A
"Regardless of the source of maintenance plans, the following principles have served me well over the years:
- PM Plans are to be effective, efficient and failure mode driven
- PM Plans are to be developed in the following manner:
The Right Tasks at the Right Time at the Right Frequency with the
Right Parts and with the Right Resources while minimizing the
amount of time the asset is taken out of service (think inspection
based PM's here)
I voted false by the way 😉" - Thomas P
"OEM’s can recommend maintenance schedules which are usually very conservative but can not optimize PM based on environmental, process, and operating dynamics." - Vic R
Dr. Darren M
"I’ve written this comment elsewhere in the thread but thought I’d share it here as well for visibility.
We need to take OEM recommendations with a hefty pinch of salt. Why? I all too often encounter OEM recommendations in my industry (pharma) that are INTENTIONALLY prohibitively short due to two major factors:
1: they haven’t completed enough robust lifetime/reliability testing and are afraid of the consequences of failure of their assets in service. So rather than increase inherent reliability of the equipment they provide maintenance plans that are unrealistic in a modern manufacturing context, effectively fostering the equipment performance validation risk onto the client
2: they want to sell you more spare parts. Selling equipment that survives for 20 years uninterrupted simply isn’t a viable business model for many OEMs. The more often you’re maintaining and replacing seals / bearings / o-rings etc etc that only they can provide, that turns a one off sale every 20 years into that + 20 yearly sales
That’s why I see my job as empowering my clients to challenge and push OEMs. Remember that they have their best interests at heart, not necessarily yours!" - Dr Darren M
"A part of the issue is:
Since Most of OEMs decided to Generate most of their profits from Service after-sales. the delivered O&M manuals to the owners changed to be very Poor useless content as a maintenance reference or guidance for the owners. On the other hand, experience in certain products according to the technology level and Hands-on are good guidance to leverage OEM or others are the best to decide maintenance development." - Mohamed R
"IMO you have to weigh both sides up the OEM may have great knowledge and support or may just simply recommend something from 20 years ago you should always review and challenge.
For warranty you should always respect the OEM guidance and try to add and improve as you learn the machine and its failures.
Good OEM's will continually update you as they find failures from other customers and will work collaboratively to eliminate them where possible." - Justin J
"True. They are in the best position to develop and produce the best maintenance plan, however often it isn’t the optimal one for the user" - Chris F
"As far as technology goes, most OEMs are helpless when it comes to performing or recommending maintenance plans. Especially in industrial automation, biomedical and robotics, customers are told to suck it up and pay extortionate prices and replacing parts that should be repaired. The alternative? Visit RepairDontWaste.com or check out the tag #Repairdontwaste to take matters into your own hands." - William S
"Besides from warranty issues that need to be adhered to, eom recommendations can/must be challenged.
The service the equipment is in, failure modes, mtbf, good practice etc
All thing that needs implemented, to get the best maintenance plan" - Christian B
"It depends mainly on your choice of CMMS tool. SAP is time based, 3 monthly, 6 monthly for example. However if you have 4 machines available and are only running 3 then one of the machines will have less run hours and therefore will not have met the timed period for its maintenance, as SAP cannot see run hours. OEM is best to meet run in and warranties however after that they tend to recommend over maintenance to enhance their reliability and to generate after sales spares." - Andy A
"Not always..as what most other guys have always stated i have seen many worse recommendations and some very good one also, but following OEM recommendation blindly is not good for sure." - Rahul S
"Short answer is yes. OEM maintenance should be followed for the environment and usage it was designed for.
The System Engineer / ILS Engineer should analysis this for the environment and usage of the system they are operating in, and the mission profile." - Daryl B
"Hi Terrence OHanlon, my take is definitive YES ! The answer is in their individual ability to use new technologies and shift their business models. I published an article in May 2020 on this subject! I think it's aging well... Tell me what you think! https://www.maintenancesystem.app/post/oems-should-explore-imaas" - Florian F
Joseph U"From experience and practice, it is not always good to follow the OEM maintenance plan because there are some factors to consider:
- Your type of operations
- The type of environment your equipment is operating
- Your organization Vision and Mission
- Your Maintenance vision that will align with the organizational goal.
"Whatever they give you is generic, you must consider experience, locations factors, culture etc to develop your equipment strategies.
In fact more often than not, applying OEM recommendations without review can waste a lot of your coy resources.
However, you'll need experience M&R professionals to help you out. DM me if you'll need assistance." - Gabriel F
"It is not. You have no idea what rationale the OEM employed to develop their maintenance plan, the vary greatly. I used to profess that some OEMs wanted you to overhaul the equipment once a quarter and others just asked you to open the door and take a look at it once every two years. Obviously that’s hyperbole but it still makes the point. If you use the OEM recommended maintenance prepare yourself to go broke and have a lot of broken equipment. I have also noticed that many failures of equipment were maintenance induced, many not some many. The CMS(Center for Medicaid and medicare System)required for many many years that you performed the maintenance plans proscribed by the OEM, this was not good and it was also costly. Someone recently woke them up and now you can vary from the OEM maintenance plan, but not without doing a risk assessment and jumping through some big hoops to do so. Common sense coupled with experience and some good old fashioned failure analysis should dictate your maintenance plans while employing good fiscal responsibility. I know this all sounds obvious but it never was to the organization’s to which I belonged and at a large medical facility that was actually the worst. I’ll get off my soapbox." - Kermit H
"Liability issue regarding warranty period, I suggest to follow the OEM maintenance manual. The purchased equipment design and technical aspect had been reviewed and met company specs, including its maintenance requirement, so we shall be committed to it. After the warranty period, we may make adjustment whether the equipment maintenance can be following Company standards, of course by proven and measurable performance, reliability and availability set by Company." - Farizan R
Reply: "In 30 years I have not experienced any success in warranty for production assets. Mobile-Yes.
To get warranty on production assets the vendor would have to do the Maintenance. Not cost effective.
Secondly, OEM strategies or warranty don’t account for the operational parameters which most operate above specification. The parameters also dictate the criticality which influences the strategies. The cost of downtime will also drive or eliminate some strategies. Reliability goes much deeper when it comes to failure identification and mitigations.
OEM is a starting point." - Rob A
Reply: "Rob A, how was the design process and equipment technical selection process by the way? Is it effective and addressed issues and operation parameters required? Is the design adequate? And why would we compensate the equipment if known beyond our operating condition/parameters? And do the facilities will have initial operation by vendor and turn key? Or if it is internally designed and no turn key phase, are all risk and quality assurance of the equipment were closely controlled and monitored?" - Farizan R
Reply: "Rob A, we give performance guarantees on the equipment we sell. So reliability is built into the sale. Out side of that your welcome to do what you like but we have strong recommendations for what should
Be done. We offer service to protect your equipment." - James L
Reply: "James L, that’s awesome. Performance guarantees are based on the equipment and the process it’s designed for. Again in thirty years purchasing equipment outside projects not much success. I applaud anyone that provides performance guarantees and backs them up.
Thanks for being that type of company." Rob A
"I voted true only because we can also leave a comment.
If the asset is designed adequately then I would be able to select the appropriate equipment based on the design requirements which should include expected reliability, maintenance and parts. If you’re waiting until it’s installed to design your maintenance plan then you are too late.
Reliability starts with design and you cannot maintain yourself out of a poor design.
It’s been a number of years and things change but we actually supplied OEM vendors with BOM load sheets for their parts. Anyone not involving their OEM vendors are missing out on an opportunity. If you can’t trust them to build a maintenance plan why would you trust them too design and manufacture the equipment?" - Rod J
"What do you follow for your automobiles?" - Mike H
"To answer this question, one only needs to remember the RCM II base example...a company installs two new pumps, one for primary operation, the other as a backup that only runs when the primary is down for maintenance. OEM recommendations would have you performing the exact same maintenance tasks at the same intervals for both pumps, which would be a complete waste of money and resources. Others in this thread have stated it better than I have, but I think a little dose of common sense goes a long way.
Oh, and dont forget, I know as maintenance professionals that we generally never want to say this but, depending on the component, and all of the factors and circumstances, sometimes, run to failure can be an acceptable and the most affordable strategy. Like the universal MBA answer, "it depends..." - Jason M
"For a huge CMMS build it’s a no from me as its a slow, inefficient process. Generics and then enrich with some location specific details as needed." - Kevin Y
"Nothing more than starting point. Thing about equipment operating in Australian Outback and in the oil sands in Canada. The maintenance strategy will definitely be different. And OEM cannot know where and how equipment is operating." - Kris G
"I think the onus is on the end user to select the right equipment and assets to best meet the requirements of their business. As has been mentioned in other comments OEM’s will base their maintenance requirements on a generic application. In my opinion these are just sufficient at best to get the equipment through it’s warranty period. I would advocate discussing your business requirements in advance with the OEM and getting agreement on the maintenance plan that best suits the end user prior to purchasing where possible to mitigate warranty issues" - Anthony G
"I think OEM recommendation is just the starting point, Especially if they offer spare parts." - Mohammed N
"Had to vote to see the results and dismayed to see that > 30% of people who voted think that OEMs are in the best position to develop maintenance plans for their equipment. We clearly have a long way to go as a maintenance community... sure OEMs have a role to play. Most OEMs will know their equipment well and understand dominant failure modes but very often they will not know the consequence of failure of their equipment in your plant and therefore for most equipment OEM recommendations should only be seen as guidance. I have seen excellent maintenance plans from top OEMs who are deeply involved in supporting and servicing their equipment around the world and therefore understand failure modes, consequence etc. But I have seen more bad OEM maintenance plans than good ones. Ultimately, we as equipment owners are in the best position to create our maintenance plans, we should understand our equipment and the consequences of failure." - Erik H
Reply: "Hi Erik, I'm fully agree with your point of view. My only concern has always been how to manage the guarantee when the maintenance strategy for the asset does not follow OEM recommendations." - Angel C
Reply: "Angel C, Follow exactly what the OEM says and prepare as if you were going to get divorced. That is, develop failure modes and effects analysis and, based on the risk, design the maintenance strategies that you must implement when the warranty expires." -José M
Reply: "In case of new assets where the investment has been completed by owners it is important to get guarantee of all piece of equipment and that is more important at this stage of the life cycle. Once the operation and maintenance organizations are familiar with the process, assess the risks and enough data is compiled, then will be the moment to evaluate the OEM maintenance recommendations and adapt to the operating envelope of the asset." -Julio N
Reply:"Angel C and Julio N, from my experience I find OEM warranties given way more weight than they deserve, in many cases the cost of the equipment that an OEM covers through a warranty is negligible compared to the production losses you incur in case of a major outage. For highly complex and critical equipment sure you want to adhere to OEM recommendations, especially in a warranty phase, but often these OEMs have better maintenance plans to work with anyway. One approach I like to take is to add early life warranty maintenance into the CMMS not as a routine PM but as only an adhoc task that is done during that initial period and then ends. Or rely on commissioning dossiers." - Erik H
Reply: "You are correct. I have same thoughts too regarding the OEM warranty phase. The only period the owner can adhere strictly to the OEM maintenance plan is during the warranty phase, especially for high-value equipment. Thereafter, the owner must develop a maintenance plan suitable for their operations. The OEM maintenance plan is just to serve as a guide." - Kéhìndé A
Reply:"Fully agree with your sentiments here Erik on all points. To add to your point I all too often encounter OEM recommendations in my industry (pharma) that are INTENTIONALLY prohibitively short due to two major factors:
1: they haven’t completed enough robust lifetime/reliability testing and are afraid of the consequences of failure of their assets in service. So rather than increase inherent reliability of the equipment they provide maintenance plans that are unrealistic in a modern manufacturing context, effectively foistering the equipment performance validation risk onto the client
2: they want to sell you more spare parts. Selling equipment that survives for 20 years uninterrupted simply isn’t a viable business model for many OEMs. The more often you’re maintaining and replacing seals / bearings / o-rings etc etc that only they can provide, that turns a one off sale every 20 years into that + 20 yearly sales
That’s why I see my job as empowering my clients to challenge and push OEMs. Remember that they have their best interests at heart, not necessarily yours!" - Dr. Darren M
Reply:"Totally agree 👍with you here. Maintenance plans should be site based not OEM based. The owners and users of the equipment should be able to design their own relevant maintenance plan on their equipment. Most OEM plans are biased, they are designed leaning towards over-maintenance." Avery C
"Best yes, optimal possibly/likely not." - Alejandro E
"OEM recommendations is your starting point. They may be added to, modified or even discontinued over time as real time in service justifies any changes. But you should be cautious about disregarding the OEM recommendations for equipment inspections and periodic checks. Often the OEM recommendations are not followed nor is any other regular checks and maintenance being done, the equipment just becomes neglected." - Roger S
"In most cases where I have been involved in maintenance, OEM guided maintenance program is often used to start off. This is recommended if the OEM as invested into a effective maintenance program for equipments, without overdoing it of course during warranty period. This is always the case if they are looking to ensure the equipments or machinery they sell are operated and maintained as intended. I have seen a few OEMs with that intention. However I have also seen OEMs who have this copied version of maintenance program which is slapped into their maintenance manual as part of scope of supply with not much thought put into the documentation. However, if the customer want to have a well guided maintenance plan, it has to be well balanced, with the OEM guided as well as maintenance plan taken throughout the industrial norms and integrated into one perfect maintenance program with effective plans. In this case, based on my experience my vote is FALSE." - Dominic B
"Base it on OEM but adapt to local environmental and operating conditions." - Joseph R
"It would be a good starting point. During warranty period, it is important to develop KPI’s to measure the effectiveness of OEM recommendations." - Mohammed S
"At component level, more likely true, while at system level, more likely false. Since, Physical Asset management is system management based that is interconnected/inter-installed with different components/equipment from different manufacturers, my answer to your question is false." - Nnabugwu K
"having been both a manufacturer and an asset maintainer/operator, most manufacturers lack the experience to develop a maintenance program, let alone develop the best operational methods. If they are good, they listen to their customers and improve the design and pass BOTH maintenance and operations recommendations along to their customers." - David M
Reply:"I’ve had some manufacturers adopt my procedures and design modifications" - Kermit H
"Quick and easy answer: Follow OEM mandated plans during the warranty period, then transition towards dependence on PIU (Proven-In-Use) & use OEM data as a basis for the initial RCM program.
Detail: OEM plans are inherently more burdensome as part of their revenue stream is made from servicing & consumable parts sales.
Using PIU data is known to be smart and is advocated within & aligns with IEC61508 for Safety Instrumented Systems (one of the compliance routes) - and it isn’t acknowledged enough as an effective method. (i.e. there’s not enough discipline crossover between Functional Safety & wider Reliability Engineering here). As such, we still broadly depend on empirical data sources with very outdated or irrelevant stats on eg. Failure & Incipiency Rates.
The levers which can then be adjusted are Inspect, Test & PM tasks, intervals, sparing and lifecycle replacement durations based on data gathered and of course based on risk tolerability & required reliability to cost targets." - Steve B
"OEMs supply IOMs with the equipment they supply. Unfortunately, the maintenance recommendations are for specific designed operating conditions which most often than not are not met. Equipment and Machines are pushed outside OEM designed operating parameters due to Production requirements and operating conditions. A critical understanding of production requirements, equipment maintenance history (MTBF, etc) and current Maintenance routine goes a long way." - Ryan R
"The manufacturer doesn't know if you are installing a motor (for example) in a busy cement factory or in a clean ice cream factory. You need to optimize the maintenance plan to suite the application and operating conditions, using the OEM as a very basic guide at early stage. Also, don't underestimate the feedback the manufacturer has received and applied to their guides!" - Dean C
"I’ve seen many poor recommendations from OEM. Such as “listen to bearings with a stethoscope once a year!” And “replace bearings after 8000 hours run time” and more." - Christer I
"New equipment should start out following the OEM recommendations but very quickly be adjusted to fit the operating context.For example: the OEM may recommend a short run time for break-in and then inspect and prepare for long term operation." - Barry S
"Very much depends on the OEM.
I have seen amazing OEM maintenance plans - although these seem to be where the OEM also offers an outsourced maintenance service agreement and performing maintenance is a large part of their business - they have the experts in house that understand reliability.
Where the OEM offers only after sales parts sales, I generally see very poor maintenance recommendations." - Simon M
"Unless they are privy to the process context. Than no. But with the digital transformation of assets including “Information asset management” I would say that the future is bright in this space." -Rob A
"Well, OEM recommendations are mostly generic, suitable to any industry. The best maintenance programs should be created considering the equipment operating conditions in mind and so it varies hugely based on type of industry, weather, age of the equipment and plant and many other factors.
So OEM recommendations can be followed during first year or so, but after that, plants Personnel should create more specific maintenance plans" - Ramesh V
Reply: "Yes yes yes."- Avery C
"It is. OEMs have the advantage to know the equipment from several clients and from design view.
Regards." - Anderson C
"False, they have no idea if that asset will be operating flat out in an outside environment, in the middle of the arctic or in a climate controlled environment and only used for standby. The maintenance requirements will be different depending on the operating context." - Daniel R
I learned a lot of OEM Maintenance recommendations from this discussion and I hope you did too. - Terrence O'Hanlon
- Reliabilityweb How to Develop a Spare Parts Stocking Strategy ›
- Reliabilityweb OEM or Non-OEM Parts? ›