Richard,
The short answer is yes. We use Weibull and Growth Analysis in Maintenance and Inspection Strategies.
We use the following approach or Process as a "Failure Elimination Work Process" :
1.- Bad actors Identification or Top ten contributors to Production Loss/Maintenance Cost in the last 2 years. We contrast the results with their criticality ,based on that, we prioritize the following: (For most critical Bad actor to least critical bad actor) (This is a continuous process):
2.- Collect the Work History (only Failures, Not PM or PdMs) and perform a Growth analysis (Crow AMSAA method) for that particular asset or Group of similar assets (Pump xx1 A/B/C)
3.- If the system is "SAD" or MTBF decreasing (usually it is the case) then, we need to do something ASAP, such..
3.1.- Reverse RCA.
3.2.- and/or Weibull analysis to better understand the Failure Pattern of the predominant Failure modes.
3.3 Based on 3.1 and or 3.2 we review the actual strategy and Adjust accordingly. Based on the Beta values of Weibull greater than 1 we can also adjust the PM frequency doing a Cost Risk analysis.
Regards
------------------------------
Antonio Alvarez
Manager
PwC
Katy TX
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 03-25-2019 02:54 PM
From: Richard Lamb
Subject: Does your plant in some way use the Weibull distribution to manage maintenance?
Lately, I've been giving a great deal of thought to the contrast of the proportional hazard regression (phreg) model to the Weibull distribution for survival/hazard analysis.
It has made me wonder. How many plants actually put the Weibull in play? And for the plants that have given it a purpose, what do they use it for?
------------------------------
Richard Lamb
Analytics4Strategy.com
Houston TX
832-710-0755
------------------------------