Forum help

Can anyone share there "best practices" in Planning utilizing the PM Module?

Audit/monitor compliance to the schedules, just setup a good report layout with IW39.

What do you mean by planning best practices?

Josh,

Best Practices are practices that have been demonstrated by "best of the best" companies. There are probably 50 plants in the US that utilize Planning and Scheduling Best Practices. I am asking if they would share them.

Ricky

Try this link to begin

http://help.sap.com/bestpractices/BBLibrary/bblibrary_start.htm

I have found the ones that are using capacity evaluation and leveling in conjunction with the Planning table are the best of the breed.

Jso

I learnt 7Ps rule for planning practices. Wnat to know that? Any guess what it stands for?

You stated in another thread: Plant, Procedures, People.

a fourth P for Parts?
a fifth for Priorities?
do not know what include for the sixth.
last P for Plan (after all other P's are accounted for).

Or 6th Plan, and then 7th Perform?

These make me remember four M's I learned in a Production Planning course back at the university:

Man (People)
Materials (Parts)
Machine (Plant?, Equipment)
Methods (Procedures)

Hint: Pls join all the 7 Ps in a sentence.

Better I tell the answer then which I learnt during one of those plant turnarounds:
7 Ps rule = Previous Proper Planning Prevents Poor Plant Performance!

Question: When is a work order considered planned?

Answer: When the Planner can answer the following questions centered on the 5 M's.

Remember that not all work orders need planning, work orders that involve trouble shooting mechanical, electrical and instrument problems may only require a good description of the problem and a contact name to help with any missing details. A current P&ID, motor elementary or a list of the last work orders written to the functional location/equipment may help complete the work order. The work order also needs an estimate of the crafts, people and time involved for scheduling purposes.

Below are the 5 M's that need to be considered when planning a work order.

"¢ Manpower – What is the staffing required to do the job? Are there more than one craft involved? Are contractors or vendors reps involved in the repairs?
"¢ Material – What material is required? Are the components stocked or do they need to be purchased? Are some components "free stores" or are they stored in a warehouse or gated storage yard? Have you checked the salvage or scrap yard for material that could be used instead of using stores stock or purchasing from a vendor? Have you check with the storeroom to see if there is any excess material at another location? Even if your facility does not stock the material, the material you need may be in excess at another facility.
"¢ Machines – What equipment is required for the job; does the repair need a welder, cutting torch, jackhammer, mag-base drill, 20 foot ladder or a forklift, man lift, crane or boom truck? This information needs to typed into the operation long text so it will print on the work order operation. The craftsmen should leave the shop with the equipment required to do the repairs or have arranged mobile equipment (crane) to meet him at the job site.
"¢ Methods – What are the jobs requirement concerning printed material. Are manuals, pictures, drawings, detailed inspection forms and repair procedures required for the job? If required, the information should be printed and attached to the work order as shop papers.
"¢ Management – Although much of a jobs management is scheduling, coordinating the on-time delivery of parts, staging material at the job site, coordinating vessel and fire watches and working with contractors and vendors are all part of managing a work order. Work order and notification closure, BOM and other documentation updates are also a part of managing a work order to completion.

Please note: You cannot plan a work order from your desk. You need to go out in the field and look at the jobs. Take copies of the work orders, a tape measure and a digital camera. Ask yourself - if I was going to do this repair, what would I need and how would I do it.

Also for Material:
* could you canibalize the parts required from another equipment that is already down, to speed up this job that can not wait for parts delivery?

quote:

Question: When is a work order considered planned?

A second before pressing the Release button.

Looking at the responsibilities of the planner, the 5 M's, he should get the manager's salary. Doing all paperwork and walking around "planning" the jobs.
What the supervisors/foremen are paid for?

To boss technicians around?

Out of jokes, supervisors are there to deal with emergencies since them are not planned. More precisely the supervisor will direct his crew to apply first aid to patch up the emergency, then will enter (or tell one of his crew to enter) a notification for a corrective maintenance that will be planned by the Maintenance Planner. In addition handle supervising tasks such as attendance, training, performamce review, discipline, etc.

quote:

supervisors are there to deal with emergencies since them are not planned

And if there are no emergencies?

Emergency for me means: eminent danger, explosion, uncontrolled plant shutdown, loss of production.
Aside of tornados tsunamis and other acts of god, almost everything can be "forecasted"

Then their action is reduced to HR paperwork, monthly (weekly?) report to the manager, chat with the new receptionist( ), and hopefully walk around to see if his crew is doing what they are supposed to do with the plans the Maintenance Planner did for them; check if they need any help.
---
Maintenace Planner area of action is the future: plan what maintenance will do during next weeks, next months, next plant shutdown.
The supervisor's is the present: which orders are due for today, for this week.

quote:

and hopefully walk around to see if his crew is doing what they are supposed to do

Do you have that problem also?

As we have concluded before: maintenance phylosophies, techniques, equipment failures, problems, oportunities arise across industries... the only change is the environment.

quote:

Maintenace Planner area of action is the future

You summed it up quite nice ..

The only times the Maintenance Planners should look at the past is when working on KPI reports or looking for a plan he/she remembers done a few months before that fits a job he/she is planning now.
What I see rather wrong is seeing a Planner handling work permits for a job that is ready to start, that's a job for the supervisor or crew leader.

Planner handling work permit?

A work permit is an agreement between owner and maintainer, that the equipment is safe to work on.
Before the permit is issued, LoTo procedures must have been applied, equipment is isolated / denergized gasfree etc.
Since the one who are going to die when things screw up, are the crew leader and operations supervisor together with craft and expectating operators, I would not leave that responsibility to a planner far away from the "battlefield" if I was part of the craft.

Good point about permits being handled by the planner. What I should have indicated is that the planner fills out the header information on the fire, vessel entry or other required permits and attaches to the work order. Then when the craftsman takes the work order/permits to the control room/or repair location for operations coordination, the permit is ready, saving time to find the correct form and fillout header. I plan to change my 5M's of planning to reflect your comments....thanks..!!

Who has used CMMS to apply work permits? All scheduled work orders will be displayed to Operations for permit issuance.

For small cold work jobs, to speed up the permission to work, no need full blown work permits but use job cards issued by operations after they record the jobs in their job card record book. The job card can also be used for walkaround by planners in the plant for safety purposes.

I have reduced the number of Permit To Work in time based PMs after negotiating with Safety the inclusion as Operations / SubOperations at the PM Order the checks leading to issue the permits. I mean:
* If every time we issue a Permit to work for this particular PM job it results that X, Y, and Z personal protective equipment must be used, and lockout/tagouts must be placed on A, and B points then I add as first task list instruction "Put on X, Y, and Z PPE", and then as second instruction: "Install lockout devices at point A and b following LOTO procedure 12-345."

Eugene, I don't understand your post above? Pls explain before and after on how you reduce the number of work permits?

We have included 2 operations for Apply/close work permits and isolate/deisolate equipment plus Close work order as well in our PM and apply one permit per PM work order with list of equipment to be worked on.

We sit down with Safety and analyzed the following:
* We have this PM task list which is executed on this equipment at this area, n times every year.
* Each time we have executed it our technician and the area supervisor filled a Permit to Work (PTW) which results in the same safety precautions to be taken prior to start the job: for example wear certain PPE, and apply LOTO.
Then, we proposed to Safety:
* if we edit the PM task list by adding operations/ suboperations that instructs the technician to put on the same PPE required at all these PTW forms for this job, and to apply the LOTO devices to the equipment following established procedure;
* if we do that, will still be necesary to document a PTW form each time we repeat this job?
Safety said: "No, with the edited PM task list you have accomplished what the PTW intends."
Then, we edited the PM task lists and also added a statement indicating that this PM was analyzed by Maintenance & Safety and it was concluded that a PTW is not necessary for this job.
With that agreement we initiated a PM task lists revision project with Safety and reduced by 60 to 70% the number of PTW forms required. The ones that remained are for situations where they could be additional risks that maybe not present every time that PM is executed, so the PTW analysis remains necessary.
At those task lists that the analysis recommended that the PTW must remain were edited to add a statement to instruct the technician to complete the PTW.

Do you mean for some PM works, no need to apply work permits because you already have instruction to wear PPE & apply LOTO in the PM work orders? If yes, it looks like preauthorized work permits.

In this case, how do the Central Control Room (CCR) knows that there are some personnel doing some PM works on certain equipment in the plant? Do the PM personnel inform CCR before starting the work and going to the equipment ie verbally or recorded in job card record book) ?

Please give examples of works which are allowed without applying work permits and which still need applying work permits.

What is LOTO btw?

Josh, LoTo is Lock-out Tag-Out procedure.

Eugene in our case, the PTW can not be issued by Safety, because we do not have dedicated safety technicians "wandering" around because they have nothing else to do


Remember I work in an oil refinery

The trade off we made for accountability:

• There are "Authorized Safety Certified Officers" ASCO's
  
• The ASCO are "mainly" operations supervisors, allthough maintenance has some ASCO they cannot authorize a PTW for their own purpose (conflict of interest)
  
• ASCO is responsible for signing hotwork, LOTO and confined space certificate, he has been trained to do the measurements
  
• Hotwork certificate is Authorized by Big Shot at Operations (Only with signature of ASCO)--> he has measured/verified and everything is safe.
  
• If all certificates are authorized, the PTW can be issued by Equipment Owner, In this case the Operations Supervisor (who coincidentally is also ASCO)
  
• when things screw-up, look for ASCO and Operations Supervisor who authorized the work
  

quote:

* if we edit the PM task list by adding operations/ suboperations that instructs the technician to put on the same PPE required at all these PTW forms for this job, and to apply the LOTO devices to the equipment following established procedure;
* if we do that, will still be necesary to document a PTW form each time we repeat this job?

In my opinion a written rule does not guarantee that some #@% will obey it. The jails are full of innocent "civilized law obeyers" victims of the system
With the PTW you "load" the accountability on someones shoulder and he has to verify that it is safe to work

I think issuance of work permits should not relieve the permit requestor/owner who should be the work supervisor from his responsibility to ensure safety of work. The permit issuer only acts as third party to ensure safety at work is proper.

IMO the permit issuer can not be a third party.

The dumbest explanation of the Permit to Work Systems I heard from "veterans"

"If enough people sign the papers, somebody will catch that something might be wrong"

In this organization, the PTW system was "very burocratic", don't know if they are working smarter now.

My point is: Let the guy who signs the PTW, be at least in the vicinity, if he can be harmed also, he wouldn't sign something blindfolded. We call that acountability

Perhaps I should clarify my view ie Operations is responsible for equipment isolation & cleaning, gas test, check proper PPE which are pre-requisites prior to start of works.

But Operations cannot be responsible for hazards from works done by the permit requetors who are mainly maintenance who should be self-regulatory in ensuring safety of his own works or actions.

quote:

But Operations cannot be responsible for hazards from works done by the permit requestors

Josh the purpose of the PTW system is "To prevent that incompatible activities take place at the same time and place, resulting in hazardous situations"

Imagine you are in a refinery and at the same moment, on the first floor, people are breaking a flanged connection, and on the second floor above, hot work (welding and cutting)is going on...

This scenario invalidates your statement about the responsibility of Operations.

Ok agreed when there are many jobs going on simultanouesly. Anyway, the permit requestors should be still self-regulatory in ensuring his works do not harm others rather than dependent entirely on others to do so.

But somebody need to have the "helicopter view", the craft and operators will be too busy working.

My answers inserted:

quote:

Originally posted by Josh:
Do you mean for some PM works, no need to apply work permits because you already have instruction to wear PPE & apply LOTO in the PM work orders? If yes, it looks like preauthorized work permits.
*** Darth: Yes, you could call the first operations of our PM Orders preauthorized PTWs.

In this case, how do the Central Control Room (CCR) knows that there are some personnel doing some PM works on certain equipment in the plant? Do the PM personnel inform CCR before starting the work and going to the equipment ie verbally or recorded in job card record book)?
*** Darth: Regardless if
(1) PTW is required (or PM Order has a "preauthorized PTW")
(2) or the PM Order has the "No PTW required statement"
the technician has to obtain an authorization to start signature from the Area Supervisor (equipment owner) or authorized designee (for example the one sitting at the Control Room).

Please give examples of works which are allowed without applying work permits and which still need applying work permits.
*** Darth: I do not understand, if the job requires a PTW can not be started (allowed) without the PTW.

What is LOTO btw?
*** Darth: Definition from OSHA website: "Lockout/Tagout (LOTO)" refers to specific practices and procedures to safeguard employees from the unexpected energization or startup of machinery and equipment, or the release of hazardous energy during service or maintenance activities. http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/controlhazardousenergy/index.html

Permit Issuer is not a third party, he/she must be the Area Supervisor (equipment owner) or his/her authorized designee.
Permit Acceptor is the Maintenance Technician who will do the job. If the job requires a crew of technicians the main responsible for the job will be the Permit Acceptor. If the crew handling the job includes outside contractors the supervisor of those will also signs as permit acceptor along with the responsible person from Maintenance Department.

The PTW Safety procedure requires training to allow an employee issue or accept PTW. At Maintenance we determined that all of our technicians must be trained and be authorized by Safety to issue/accept PTW. I would not have a crew of mechanics waiting at a pump station for a PTW acceptor to arrive, one of them must grab the PTW form and complete it with the Utilities Operator.

Eugene, from your reply I got the impression that the mechanics were waiting for you at the pump station

That is how we landed at this PTW discussion

quote:

But Operations cannot be responsible for hazards from works done by the permit requestors

Operations (Equipment Owners) are the PTW Issuers, Maintenance the PTW Acceptors; both are responsible for identify:
* risks/hazards present at the job/area,
* options to eliminate, control, minimize them
* Measures and precautions to be applied during job duration.
* Who and how frequently will monitor the job to ensure PTw conditions are maintained, no aditional risk/hazards have arised, etc.

For example, weather conditions may change after PTW issuance, should a reassesment of the safety of the job must be done? additional precautions taken? or even halt job until futher notice?

quote:

Originally posted by svanels:
Eugene, from your reply I got the impression that the mechanics were waiting for you at the pump station

That is how we landed at this PTW discussion

Waiting for me? I'm just one and this is a biiiiiig plant. They ussually wait for a Production Supervisor who have not enough trained designees to issue PTWs. Utilities were more wise and trained all his staff (except the secretary) to handle PTW.

Eugene, pls list examples of PM works can be given preauthrized PTW or no PTW at all (with relevant statements in the PM work orders) and which PM works still need to apply for PTW proper.

Ok I'm familiar with the term equipment isolation/deisolation which include LOTO.

OK then who is the single point responsibility for PTW? Operations, Maintenance or HSE?

The single point responsibility for PTW?

Josh, think logical, if someone dies on the job caused by an accident, who will go to jail?

From your post, it's operations and not maintenance.

Who granted access to the high voltage line / tank filled with toxic gases / vessel under pressure / ...... (just fill in the blanks), stating that it is safe to work?

His name will be on the permit, and it will be used in court.

I think accidents wouldn't occur if these conditions are already known as per your examples. Often accidents occur because of incomplete cleaning, trapped gases or substances, accidentally deLOTO high volatge line etc.

Even if PTW issued, it's still a good practice to doublecheck these conditions before and during work eg wearing the gas detector because safety is at our own hands ie self-regulatory.

If acidents happen, it's the failure of the HSE or PTW system.

Accidents happen because people take short cuts, blaming it on HSE is the easy way out.

Josh, I think that you already know my opinion about marvellous systems that look good on paper when the "auditors" come, but in reality the grunts out there has no protection neither safety.

quote:

In my opinion a written rule does not guarantee that some #@% will obey it. The jails are full of innocent "civilized law obeyers" victims of the system

Then, what difference it makes:
* writting a check mark on a PTW form to indicate that certain rule or precaution will be follow during the job to minimize/ control/ eliminate a risk, vs
* write a checkmark on a Maintenance Order to document that instruction 0010 (which reads the identical rule or precaution) was executed?
Will documenting it twice ensure compliance to the rule?

quote:

Originally posted by Josh:
OK then who is the single point responsibility for PTW? Operations, Maintenance or HSE?

HSE (we call them SHE) has the overall responsibility of the PTW system, this means:
* setup the policy,
* train the plant (PTW Issuers, PTW Acceptors, all others employess who need to know what a PTW is)
* monitor/audit the areas for compliance with policy.
Operations and Maintenance: as PTW Issuers and Acceptors have their responsibilities as well.
---
If there is a major accident at the plant we have to report it to the company headquarters, and the Operations Director is the one who take the call back, (regardless that Safety and Maintenance reports to the Engineering Director).

[QUOTE]Originally posted by svanels:
Who granted access to the [b]high voltage line ....QUOTE]
The PTW identify other permits required for certain jobs. For example, our plant require a second permit for works carried out in high voltage areas. To enter those areas the Maintenance Engineer who has almost all electricians reporting to him has to approve that second permit. If he is not available then it is the Maintenance Manager (who is also an Electrical Engineer) who can authorize the entrance, no other designees are allowed.

Josh, Eugene there are so many ways that things can go wrong, aside all precautions we take.
Since this is a complex activity, I have problems with terms like self-regulating etc..
At the end nobody is responsible nor accountable.

Eugene, what are your PM works which can be done without applying after inclusions of certain statements in the WO operations? And what PM works must apply work permits. I like to see the difference.

First example: PM of an Air Handling Unit was edited to add the following instructions:
SAFETY INSTRUCCIONS FOR PM EXECUTION
* Follow all the SHE instructions pre evaluated to execute the PM.
* Jobs to be performed by external contractors must complete a PTW form.
* PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT required: Safety glasses, Safety shoes.
* For tasks in height over 4 ft use type A Ladder.
* Follow LOTO procedure, refer to the equipment manual.
* For tasks at CONFINED SPACES: Follow instructions of the Confined Spaces procedure.
The actual PM instructions include vibration analysis for bearings (fan and motor), check insulation conditions, change prefilters & filters, check pulleys alignment, clean cooling coil, verify VFD, among others.

Eugene, I'm interested to know your good practice ie no need to apply work permits for certain PM works.

Can you outline the criteria used? Also can you list examples of PM works which no need to apply works and which need to apply?

If your practice can be applied elsewhere and worth-duplicating, the it can be considered as a best practice.

quote:

Originally posted by svanels:
Josh, Eugene there are so many ways that things can go wrong, aside all precautions we take.
Since this is a complex activity, I have problems with terms like self-regulating etc..
At the end nobody is responsible nor accountable.

But then, how many safety personnel would you need to watch over a maintenance crew of 60+ employees scattered around a multibuilding facility with a large exterior utilities area. Not counting that Utilities and Operations jobs have their associated risks as well. We can not afford to have a vision of Safety as the policeman watching everybody.
Each one has to be responsible for his/her own safety and the safety of those around you affected by your job/actions. Safety must move to become the trainer, advisor, facilitator to empower all others to do their jobs safely.
Is a proactive view of Safety than reactive.
---
Some high hazardous tasks like confined space entry, fire system impairment, still need need PTW and additional permits requiring a Safety Representative review/signature, but routine jobs must be deal with between the Maintenance Technician and the Operations Supervisor/designee.

And the second example?

The project started after a conversation with Safety were Maintenance asked why PTW are not required for routine operations conducted at Production areas. Safety expalined that:
* HAZOPs studies were conducted for those operations,
* risks and hazards were identified and analyzed,
* measures to control, minimize and/or eliminate the risks were applied, and
* written operational procedures were developed with the SHE precautions and instructions for safe operation.

Operators are trained on the procedures and supervision is there to ensure compliance to them, therefore the intention of the PTW is already met with the procedures.

Then Maintenance said:
* We have repetitive tasks (PM) like the routine operations of Production.
* We have written instructions (PM Orders) for those tasks.
* Our technicians are trained and under supervision.
If the conditions are equivalent, can PM orders be exempted from PTW?
Safety then agreed to evaluate with us the PM tasks lists, in a HAZOP like manner, besides some of the PM tasks were initially inserted due to recommendations of the equipment operation HAZOP study.
* From start, any PM that is limited to visual inspection, gauge readings documentation, no equipment disassembly, was exempt of PTW, provided that an instruction for the PPE required for access the equipment location was included.
* any job to be executed with outside contractors, require PTW.
* If conditions of the jobs are the not the same each time that the task list is executed, then PTW is required. For example, if the same task list is used for 10 fans, but some are wall mounted at 20 ft high, others can be serviced standing on the floor.

Quoted: From start, any PM that is limited to visual inspection, gauge readings documentation, no equipment disassembly, was exempt of PTW, provided that an instruction for the PPE required for access the equipment location was included.

Look like the above could be largely operator's tasks. If maintenance do the same, will they still have to inform the Control Room first that they are going to the plnat area?

Yes, even if the PM instructions are only visual inspection the PM SOP requires that the area supervisor or designee sign the PM order to authorize the start of the job. A second signature from the Area Supervisor or designee is required after the job is done for acknowledgement of job done.