A Framework for Metro Maintenance Management - Workspace

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

A PRACTICAL MANAGEMENT

FRAMEWORK

FOR

METRO

MAINTENANCE

Paper submitted for the Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting (2013) and for consideration for the Transportation Research Record Date submitted: 1st August 2012 Date revised: 13th November 2012

Corresponding author: Richard Parasram Research Analyst Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London E-mail: [email protected] Robin Steel Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London E-mail: [email protected] Rory J. Maxwell Abellio Transport Holdings E-mail: [email protected] Richard Anderson Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London E-mail: [email protected] Robin C d'A Hirsch Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London E-mail: [email protected] Patricia C. Melo Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London E-mail: [email protected]

WORD COUNT : Abstract: 190 Text: 4737 References: 675 Tables: 1000 words Figures: 1250 words Total: 7177 [without reference list] 7852 [with reference list]

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

2

ABSTRACT Although numerous Maintenance Management Frameworks (MMFs) exist in many industries, a literature review failed to find a practical one developed specifically with urban rail transit systems (metros) in mind. Using evidence and experience from a qualitative survey of senior metro maintenance managers, the Railway and Transport Strategy Centre created a descriptive, practical MMF building upon existing literature and Moubray’s ‘three generations of maintenance’. The framework specifies three broad bandings, which indicate the relative maturity and sophistication of different management practices and associated analytical techniques. Metro managers may use it to map their maintenance maturity relative to a group of technologically developed metros. The framework is linked to case studies providing practical examples of changes made by metros in maintenance practices. Further, it may be used to frame types of expected performance outcomes achievable by moving through the defined stages of maintenance maturity. It also identifies key barriers and enablers to this transition. The paper takes this framework as a basis to analyse the survey results, which highlight that the metro industry has embraced planned preventive techniques, but has yet to fully realise the possibilities of holistic and continuous improvement strategies. KEYWORDS: Maintenance Management Framework, Rail Transit Systems, Metro, Subway.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

3

1. INTRODUCTION Urban rail transit operators (referred to in this paper as ‘metros’) are under increasing pressure to deliver ever higher reliability, generally while being asked to reduce costs. Maintenance quality is critical to this reliability [1]. In order to reconcile these seemingly conflicting priorities, metros must manage the inter-related challenges of ongoing evolution of maintenance capabilities and approach, control of expenditure, (internal and external) barriers to change and technological and organisational developments which act as catalysts for change. At the same time metros face significant challenges due to a complex combination of factors. The sheer number of passengers on metros leads to high safety and service quality impacts of maintenance failures (as discussed by Pham [2]) and high public interest in reliability and availability. Geographic diversity ensures many elements of their infrastructure (e.g. track or tunnelling) are inaccessible during service hours, limiting time available for maintenance operations. Their ‘output’ (essentially passenger kilometres) is specific to a time and location – the ‘product’ has to be consumed when it is produced. Many of a metro’s assets are bespoke due to unique or unusual operating environments. They also have highly interdependent system dynamics, for example if a train breaks down in a tunnel or there is a system-wide signalling fault, there will be wider ripple effects than in most conventional systems that require maintenance. A comprehensive understanding of metro specific maintenance practices and their output effects is therefore essential for metro managers given that even marginal improvements to maintenance efficiency and effectiveness can mean significant performance improvement and / or savings. Maintenance costs made up an average of 35.8% of “Community of Metros” (CoMET) and Nova1 members’ total annual operating expenditure in 2011 [3]. Although numerous Maintenance Management Frameworks (MMFs) exist in other industries [4], a literature review failed to find a practical framework developed specifically with metro maintenance managers in mind. Using practical evidence and experience from a qualitative survey of senior metro maintenance managers, the Railway and Transport Strategy Centre (RTSC) created a descriptive, practical framework building upon a review of maintenance literature and Moubray’s [5] three generations of maintenance: 1. First generation: fix it when it is broken 2. Second generation: scheduled overhauls and routine maintenance; systems for planning and controlling work 1

CoMET and Nova are benchmarking groups facilitated by the Railway and Transport Strategy Centre at Imperial College London. At the time of the analysis in this paper, the CoMET and Nova groups comprised 27 metros. The CoMET group included major metros from the cities of Beijing, Berlin, Hong Kong, London, Mexico City, Madrid, Moscow, New York, Paris, Santiago, Shanghai and Sao Paulo. The Nova group comprised small to medium sized metros from Buenos Aires, Barcelona, Bangkok, Brussels, Delhi, Lisbon, Milan, Montréal, Naples, Newcastle, Rio de Janeiro, Singapore, Sydney (the urban rail operator), Taipei and Toronto. The groups were initiated in 1994 and are focused on using benchmarking to identify and share best practices in metro operations and management.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

4

3. Third generation: condition monitoring; hazard studies; effects analyses or expert systems. The study set out with the following objectives:   

Examine the organisation and development of maintenance practices and asset management strategy required as metros introduce new and advanced technology Create a structure to aid maintenance managers’ thinking in dealing with the dimensions affecting metro availability and reliability, such as organisational arrangements and maintenance practices Frame types of expected performance outcomes that can be achieved as a metro develops more sophisticated maintenance techniques.

The MMF developed in this paper synthesises and maps a series of themes with recorded metro practices and operational output (in terms of reliability and availability) and provides context for balancing these with the efficient management of resource inputs. The framework also provides a context of broad bandings which indicate the relative maturity and sophistication of different management practices and associated analytical techniques employed. It may be used by metro maintenance managers to:  Map their maintenance maturity relative to the practices of technologically developed metro peers  Frame types of expected performance outcomes achievable by moving through the defined stages of metro maturity  Link to case study examples of how metros have made changes to more mature practices. The rest of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 of the paper reviews the literature in this area and Section 3 describes data selection and methodology. Section 4 sets out the basis of the practical MMF drawing upon the literature review and developed specifically for metros, and links it to the metro survey results. Section 5 draws on the results of the paper to make conclusions.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

5

2. THREE GENERATIONS OF MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE MODELS AND THEIR RELEVANCE TO METRO MANAGEMENT Several maintenance management frameworks and models have been developed: as a series in Wireman’s book on maintenance indicators [6]; Campbell and Reyes-Picknell’s Uptime Pyramid of Excellence [7]; and those by Waeyenbergh and Pintelon [8] and Soderholm et al [9]. There have been also several general reviews of maintenance models / frameworks including those by Campos [10], Sherwin [11], a historical overview by Dekker [12], a survey of preventive techniques by Valdez-Flores and Feldman [13], a review of overall maintenance strategies by Pintelon and Gelders [14] and a synthesis of frameworks by Mishra et al [4]. The benefits of MMFs are discussed by Aalbregste et al. [15]. Further study into how maintenance organisations evolve to cope with technological advances is undertaken by Vanneste and Wassenhove [16] as well as the limitations created by their environment; either physical or political. A review of this work provides the basis for this section and to examine elements of other selected maintenance models in the literature, exploring their relevance to metro management in the context of Moubray’s three generations of maintenance [5]. 2.1 The Improved Deming Wheel Vanneste and Van Wassenhove [16] defined effectiveness as “doing the right thing” and efficiency as “doing the thing right”. Their integrated approach to using these concepts in maintenance is shown in Figure 1. Specific metro characteristics mean that they often struggle to develop a clear picture of the efficient and effective balance of inputs to performance outputs, particularly across a wide range of interacting asset types, and as stated in Section 1, the effects of downtime can be very severe. The continuous improvement element of this improved Plan Do Check Act cycle is “third generation” maintenance.

FIGURE 1

Vanneste and Van Wassenhove’s Improved Deming Wheel [16]

2.2 Terotechnology For a metro a general Terotechnology process would be to design, specify, procure and then operate and maintain a wide range of assets / infrastructure covering most engineering disciplines [17-19]. This process includes all three generations of maintenance. Good record keeping in the operational phase is a foundation for progressing through the generations of maintenance. Implementation of the US military’s Test Analyse And Fix (TAAF) process [20] and strong data analysis are typical second generation techniques, including scheduled

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

6

overhauls, routine inspection and maintenance frequencies, and systems for planning and controlling work. There are also elements of third generation maintenance including Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA, see [21]) and an optimisation loop focusing on design and function in metro operation and maintenance. 2.3 Kelly’s policy ranking Kelly wrote about several elements of maintenance and ranked maintenance policy [22]. The generation of the different elements is shown in brackets.     

(1) Operate to failure (2) Age/block preventive maintenance (2) Condition-based (condition determined by inspection while stopped) (2) Condition-based (condition determined with machine running) (3) Design out if economically possible.

The policies identified here as second generation and also a key basis of the transition to third generation are particularly relevant, as metros are conventionally highly constrained as to when they are able to carry out inspections. This puts a higher level of importance on the benefits from predictive maintenance and self-diagnosis of assets. 2.4 Crespo Marquez et al.’s practical framework for maintenance management Crespo Marquez et al. have carried out a lot of research into MMFs (for example: creating an MMF based on the (International Asset Management) PAS 55 standard [23, 24] and carrying out a full review and analysis of frameworks [10]). Their generic maintenance framework based on an overall review of literature is shown in Figure 2. They highlighted at a general level elements of maintenance execution that are of particular relevance to metros. The survey of metro maintenance managers identified that most metros are operating in the ‘Efficiency’ and Assessment’ phases of Crespo Marquez et al.’s framework. Although many were maturing from rules based / fixed interval practices to more sophisticated planned preventive stages of second generation maintenance, very few metros were questioning their own ‘Effectiveness’, and embracing a ‘Continuous improvement’ drive. These last two factors are features of expert practitioners, building on ‘third generation’ maintenance techniques. Preventive maintenance itself is currently evolving on the basis of more sophisticated analysis, as explained by Zhao [25].

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

FIGURE 2

7

Crespo Marquez et al.’s maintenance management model [26]

For many metros understanding of the first three phases of the model in Figure 2 is so far superficial, with progress in many cases constrained by limited data and knowledge of historic assets of a variety of disciplines. 2.5 Mishra et al.’s proposed framework for world-class maintenance systems Mishra et al. [4] carried out an exhaustive review of maintenance frameworks and attempted to identify the distinguishing elements in world-class systems (shown in Figure 3). They proposed that leadership and change management were the foundation for a world-class system. The process improvement aspect includes elements of Total Productive Maintenance [27] including having small groups devoted to devising and implementing improvements, traits of more third generation maintenance procedure. All elements within this collation could be related to metros, but the focus on human factors in creating barriers and enablers to improvement was considered particularly important.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

8

FIGURE 3 Proposed framework for world-class maintenance systems following a review by Mishra et al [4] 2.6 The current literature in relation to metro maintenance management This literature was reviewed to form the basis of an analysis of a survey into metro maintenance management practices. Although several frameworks with factors highly relevant to the challenges for metros were discovered, the review found a lack of:   

A practical MMF created specifically with metros in mind, identifying and setting out a structure to deal maintenance management issues facing them. Linkage between theory and examples of practical improvements in metro practice A framework expressed in metro specific terminology rather than complex jargon

The knowledge of these issues informed the development of the questionnaire that was sent out to metros, as discussed in Section 3. 3. DATA AND METHODOLOGY Following discussion with the CoMET and Nova metros to establish requirements and parameters a scope was prepared. The study set out to carry out a high level questionnairebased review of:    

General maintenance management strategies employed for each of the wide range of key asset classes deployed by metros Influences on the organisation of the maintenance function Governance models used and their implementation Management of relationship between projects and maintenance teams.

27 member metros were requested to complete a structured mini-report explaining how they approached the issues mentioned above for a series of asset types: rolling stock; signalling and control; communications; stations; permanent way; civil engineering; and a more general approach. Case Study examples of practices implemented by metros were sought, to provide an understanding of why changes in approach had been taken and the benefits yielded.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9

Respondees were specifically asked to provide explanations that best illuminated the impact of maintenance management approaches and policy. Table 1 below shows the instructions given to metros for a selection of the requested factors. Metros were encouraged to provide as detailed a response as possible and to provide supporting materials wherever possible. FACTOR Aims of asset management and maintenance

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

INSTRUCTIONS State the primary aim(s) of asset management and maintenance policies for each key category of asset and how multiple aims are prioritised, if at all. State the balance of maintenance approach for each class of asset Methodological between “run-to-fail”, corrective, preventive (planned cycle), approach to preventive (proactive – changing operating conditions) predictive, maintenance risk-based, condition-based, reliability-centred (several may apply). Please describe the typical interventions during the whole asset life Asset lifecycle cycle from commissioning to replacement. Please explain if you take approach a total lifecycle costing and total systems approach How do you deliver the key interventions described? For example: 1. In-house team totalling x staff working at y depots on z number of assets, OR Organisation of 2. Contract maintenance covering the whole life cycle? OR maintenance teams 3. Contract maintenance for heavy maintenance only? AND 4. Line-based teams or teams based on location of assets? Please provide examples of changes in maintenance practices you have introduced covering a range of asset types. Please include Mini case-study details of the specific change made, the rationale for this change, key examples of changes steps in the change process and the cost of implementing the changes in maintenance and the (quantified) impacts from them. Please include detail of any practices key challenges and difficulties you face and of how these were overcome. TABLE 1 Questionnaire Structure for Maintenance Approaches 17 responses were received and analysed by the RTSC to identify gaps and inconsistencies across the group. Structured follow-up questions were sent to all participants to add depth to and clarify responses, ensuring a consistent, comparable and reliable set of information. These questions requested further detail about why specific approaches were chosen, probed motivations behind unusual or interesting practice and sought to understand localised factors behind decision making. 12 of the respondees were interviewed by telephone, to further discuss and elucidate ideas presented, including structured case study interviews. 7 of these metros were then interviewed again. The combination of structured questionnaires and follow-up interviews was chosen to maximise the comparability and depth of the responses. As identified by Trompet and Graham [28], a main contributing factor of good data quality in benchmarking groups is strict confidentiality as it encourages an open and honest information sharing environment. For this reason, although the CoMET and Nova members agreed that this study’s findings should be shared through this paper; graphs, tables and text have been anonymised where appropriate.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

10

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Responses to the questionnaire were collated, compared and synthesised to provide complementary insights and detailed examples based on the experiences and practices provided by metros. In identifying those processes, measures and factors that contribute most to metro maintenance management, a generalised framework was developed. This employs metro terminology to guide managers’ thinking and structure stages in maintenance practice maturity, as well as reflecting key barriers and enablers to development through these stages. This was linked to the case study examples provided by metros. The framework specifically addresses the gaps in previous literature highlighted in Section 2.6, adding a practical management element to it, but builds on Moubray’s three generations of maintenance and a number of other relevant features identified in other models. 4.1 The MMF The MMF (Figure 4) illustrates the evolution of metro maintenance management and the key progression stages of organisations through awareness and towards expert management of their maintenance needs. The basic approaches exhibited are shown in Table 2. A small sample of the more than 30 examples, provided by metros in their mini case studies, of changes to a more mature level of maintenance practice are given in tables 3 and 4. These are followed by a discussion of the survey results and conclusions including the key barriers to, and enablers of development.


11

Aware

Expert Planned preventive techniques

Repair based

Holistic regime change and predictive

Metros’ further analysis-based

Corrective (Run to Failure) • May be suitable for some short-lived electrical and mechanical equipment e.g. light bulbs • Stations

Proactive process redesign

• Data driven analysis • Predictive • RCM (Activities / Frequencies / Management) • Lean ‘Six Sigma’

• Multi-disciplinary mechanism for continuous improvement • Holistic maintenance • Review of regime effectiveness • Self-diagnosis of E&M assets

Rule Based (Fixed Plan) Maintenance •Interval-based frequency • Usage-based • Balanced for resources, not finances

•Often suit a single objective •Rules may become enshrined as ‘standards’ • Often long applied to historic assets E&M assets e.g. (Rolling stock, escalators, track and signalling components) tend to start with time or distance based rules.

Dynamic / Continuous improvement / Empirical analysis A more sophisticated fixed-asset maintenance practice is to automate the inspections by having built in sensors. E.g. for civil infrastructure or station assets

For fixed assets the regime tends to be condition based. At the lower stages of maturity fixed assets (e.g. Civil infrastructure or track) tend to have fixed time based inspection cycles, which then may or may not result in work

Condition-Based Maintenance • Inspection (STDS, Condition) • Fixed frequency • Rule based actions

• Real-time ACM • Diagnostic inspections • Root-cause / risk-based analysis •Intelligent monitoring tools

Barriers to development of maintenance management practices Entrenched Stakeholders

Poor incentives

Inflexibility of standards

Risk averse leadership

Lack of data

Reliability of technology

Enablers for development of maintenance management practices Leadership

1 2 3

FIGURE 4

Contract reviews

The Maintenance Management Framework

Benchmarking

New assets

Technology platform changes

Asset info. systems

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

12

As the surveyed metros have matured, all have moved from repair based, run to failure maintenance (except where these remain appropriate for typically short life, low safety / service critical assets) to more sophisticated regimes. This initial shift generally first took the form of time or rules-based maintenance regimes drawing on suppliers’ recommendations and / or maintenance management’s experience. Greater awareness, together with advances in asset information systems and analysis techniques, then allowed metros to move towards undertaking analyses specific to their own assets and data to improve maintenance regimes. More recently, as real-time Asset Condition Monitoring (ACM) has become more common and included in new assets (See [2], and [29] for a reliability centred approach to remote ACM), a few metros have started to become expert in maintaining some or all of their assets. This has allowed them to become both efficient and effective through: the accurate use of predictive maintenance, complete changes in the way in which maintenance organisation is structured and fundamental and continuously improving reviews of historically established maintenance regimes. Study responses evidenced multiple barriers and enablers affecting the rate of progress in this evolution for some metros and these are discussed throughout this section. Table 2 summarises the broad approaches to maintenance at different maturity levels, on a generalised level. It also lists some advantages and disadvantages of these approaches. The three approaches are shown with reference to the MMF in Figure 4. Despite the host of advantages to advanced maintenance strategies, most metros surveyed exhibited largely planned preventive techniques, although the majority evidenced progress from ‘rule based’ towards further analytical practices based on metros’ own experiences. Table 3 and Table 4 summarise a small sample of case studies and examples of changes in maintenance practice collected and their respective results, as reported by the metros. They indicate that the majority are operating within the growing ‘awareness’ elements of the maintenance management framework (marked in blue on the framework and shown in Table 3). Only a few metros (and often for only a limited number of asset classes) have evolved practices at the ‘expert’ levels of predictive and / or dynamic condition-based monitoring (Table 4). This was most often achieved through implementing fundamental maintenance regime reviews, resulting in improved performance as well as significant cost efficiencies. A key to this was to focus on questioning the effectiveness of maintenance, through organisation functions with a specific remit to promote continuous improvement, in addition to looking for ways to improve efficiency in practice. These examples provide a context for the following discussion about barriers and catalysts that were outlined for metro maintenance development.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo Approach Strategy

1

/

Advantages

13

Disadvantages

• Can be inefficient • More frequent train or service critical asset failures with • Low short term maintenance costs Repair Based On failure potentially greater delay impacts • Longer intervals between maintenance checks (Least mature) • Unplanned maintenance • Increased total life cycle costs • Stress & wear on other components Range from • Increased short term maintenance • Minimise total life cycle costs crude ‘rules cost based’ to • Improved efficiency and effectiveness of • Increased labour resources Preventive metros’ own maintenance activity • More frequent maintenance checks (Aware) risk, reliability • Higher levels of fleet utilisation and • Tends to be single output focused or criticality (targets a specific improvement / availability based analysis efficiency) • Targets holistic / multiple outcomes and balanced objectives; likely to be most • Rigorous data collection required efficient overall • Requires dedication of staff as well • Improved rolling stock and other service as advanced training and skill-level critical asset reliability and availability • May be dependent on deployment • Optimised maintenance schedules of more sophisticated technological • Avoid unnecessary maintenance : extended platforms Holistic and predictive Full-scale maintenance frequencies based on condition regime review • Can be difficult to overcome (Expert) monitoring – reduction in (planned) service organisational inertia : requires disruption strong leadership from a group • Increased cost effectiveness (long term) whose role is to challenge based on • Dynamic condition-based and predictive continuous review of regime monitoring tailor maintenance interventions effectiveness to specific requirements just before they are needed TABLE 2 Key features of metros’ maintenance at the different maturity levels


14

Region Metro’s change Reported results South Initially preventive periodic maintenance of station-based assets America undertaken on a semi-annual, annual and biennial basis by 7 teams of The teams that performed the semiannual, annual 3 employees and biennial maintenance have been reduced from 3 to 2 employees per team, enabling a reduction of Studies carried out to investigate increasing efficiency and to increase 9% in the quantity of employees for escalators the competitiveness with international and domestic KPIs. Monitoring maintenance. intervention frequency and component repair cycles were adjusted. Pacific Improved train door motor defect tagging process following Six • Improved door motor defect tagging process Rim • Replaced life expired solenoid spool valves Sigma analysis (See Antony [30]). • Improved defect reporting forms for general The Problem inspections (GI’s) Body-side doors were one of the top 5 causes of peak incidents, • Additional door inspection tasks were added to causing about 5% of rolling stock incidents per year. In 07/08 these Technical Maintenance Plan (TMP). doors accounted for: 33 peak incidents, 28 peak delays and 206 24hr • A 37% improvement in reliability since the incidents. project started Key Findings / Recommendations • A 60% reduction in solenoid spool valve failures in first half of 2010 Door adjustments (motor, speed, height, and track) were critical. The following tasks were carried out: • Lubrication of door motors to reduce friction and door tack wear. • A mid-cycle general inspection of doors improved door performance and reliability. A function check during the 15 day PR inspection picked up poor performing doors before failing. • Solenoid spool valve was life expired

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo Region Metro’s change South Since 2003, the metro has been developing a Daily Rolling Stock fleet America Work Routine Management programme, through which all working processes are reviewed and standardised. Indicators and metrics have been created based on Root Cause Analysis of critical points and targets have been established in order to measure performance.

1

TABLE 3

15

Reported results Peak fleet utilisation has increased from 87% to 98% since 2003. A rate of failure repeatability report is released three times a week in order to provide information regarding the recurrence of failures by car, by train and by cause which had caused failure within the last seven days. Based on these data it is possible to verify the effectiveness of reactive maintenance and also define strategies, studies and actions to eliminate the recurrent failures. Examples of metros moving from rules-based maintenance approaches to more metro / asset specific analysis


16

1 Region

2

Metro’s change

Reported results • Rolling stock fleet life expectation more than doubled from initial design life through condition based maintenance and monitoring Adopted comprehensive long term asset strategy on and life extension investments the basis of a ‘fleet life extension protocol’ based • Extended intervention frequencies significantly reduce service Pacific on condition based maintenance practices and disruption Rim analysis that has been developed into asset life • Peaks in long term rolling stock fleet asset expenditure smoothed extension strategies. and deferred on the basis of detailed asset condition knowledge, allowing other infrastructure asset expenditure priorities also to be addressed. • 31% decrease in human resources required for maintenance, Set up special team to analyse the functions, failure representing a reduction of 2,025 man-hours or US$ 87,685.35 per South modes, effects and risks of failure, and elaborated year. America proposals for changes in maintenance processes for • The mean time between failures also increased by 30% to 143,195 Signalling assets. hours, over a period of 4 years. • Around 80% of maintenance is dealt with at the newer multifunctional line-based centres, where they are available. The more Progressively deployed a new model of technical or larger problems are sent to the specialist centres that maintenance management, harnessing the ACM exist for lines that have not moved to the newer system yet. Europe capabilities of new Electrical and Mechanical asset • Multi-functional locations are able to deal with issues at stations equipment and re-organising maintenance staff into more quickly multi-disciplinary, geographically dispersed, teams. • Far more comprehensive understanding of asset performance than at other metros TABLE 4 Examples of metros moving from planned preventive to more holistic maintenance approaches

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

17

4.2 Barriers and enablers to metros’ development of maintenance management practices Metros’ responses and case studies identified several key barriers constraining their progress towards more mature maintenance practices, as well as illustrating key catalysts that had enabled development. These were classified under generic headings and included in the MMF (Figure 4). Many metros, particularly older ones, performed maintenance management practices according to a “Rules-Based (Fixed Plan) Maintenance” scheme (see Figure 4) mid-way between the repair based and planned preventive approaches. Key attributes of maintenance organisations in this position included: 



Maintenance interventions based on rigid rules (e.g. mileage) that may have been specified and enshrined many years earlier and are potentially no longer appropriate, given developments in inspection technology or asset design. Intervals driven by the availability of legacy resources, rather than a desire to minimise cost and / or maximise reliability; the maintenance regime was often also focused on a single goal (e.g. Mean Distance Between Failure) rather than planned to balance the objectives of multiple stakeholders For many historic assets, pre-dating the advance in asset information management systems, deficiencies in available data hampered the analysis g required to challenge well established ‘rules’.

Metros in this position found themselves with the technology and capability to advance towards more efficient processes such as Terotechnology [19], but progress could be constrained or delayed by a variety of barriers. 4.2.1 Barriers to maintenance practice development Inflexible standards Metros stated that inflexible or overly-prescriptive standards made it difficult to develop more sophisticated planned preventive maintenance techniques, particularly when the standards were input rather than output-based, and / or where rules-based fixed-plan maintenance schedules had become embedded within them. They reported that the more difficult it is to change a standard, the less likely it will happen – meaning that future actions are based on the past, rather than developing the best regimes for a given set of (often changing) circumstances. Risk-averse leadership Moving away from inspection-based planned-preventive techniques poses a safety risk that must be managed. Metro leadership reported an unwillingness to do this, as the pressure to minimise risk outweighs the need for continual improvement (or their mandate to deliver it). This resulted in maintenance techniques remaining at more labour-intensive and costly phases.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

18

Poor incentives Poor incentives also served as a barrier to development. If correct incentives are not in place, this can also hamper progress to maintenance maturity. Examples given by metros included:  

Funding based on duration of tasks rather than their outcome Slower career progression for those who made themselves redundant through efficiency.

Entrenched stakeholders Entrenched stakeholders and competing vested interests also had significant impacts on progress to maintenance maturity, often exacerbating the impact of other barriers, for example making the standards change process incremental and / or attritional. Examples given by metros included:    

Section budgets being defended rather than efficiencies rooted out General management inertia Lack of skills and/or flexibility required to implement new techniques Labour union resistance to any change that might entail job losses or changes to employee flexibility or working patterns.

Lack of data Many of the more mature maintenance techniques depend on detailed analysis of wellmaintained and structured asset data, in order to identify service critical issues and opportunities for more efficient or effective maintenance. As mentioned above, knowledge about older assets is constrained by lack of data, especially asset history records, which makes the application of analysis based techniques a significantly more challenging task than for newer systems and assets for which the required data has been captured from the outset. Reliability of technology Without available information and where reliability of assets is critical to service delivery, metros reported that it was often deemed safer to stick with a process that had worked in the past. The need to protect reliability, or an unwillingness to trust the reliability of new technology or practices was evidenced as a barrier to taking on holistic regime change and predictive maintenance. 4.2.2 Enablers of Maintenance Practice Development A variety of ‘Enablers’ (see Figure 4) have helped metros succeed in overcoming these barriers.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

19

Benchmarking Benchmarking can act as a catalyst when it is used by proactive leadership to understand and highlight:    

Organisation (internal and external) strengths and weaknesses Where improvements are most likely achievable What has/has not worked elsewhere How good ideas can be implemented

The ‘drill-down’ study commissioned by (European) Metro E as a follow-up to an asset specific management study indicated that their practice was at variance and more costly than the majority of its peers. The study’s detailed findings revealed substantial differences between metros in technology specification and supply chain management, maintenance and refurbishment practices, including condition monitoring and productivity management. They stated that: “This study has led to a radical new strategy for managing escalators and other assets in [Metro E] and to a significant change in culture. We now expect that it will lead to savings in the region of 0.6 billion USD across the entire [Metro E] escalator fleet. The recent procurement for the next 50 escalators is beginning to realise these benefits (48.2 million USD capex and 29.4m opex) at the level expected in the benchmarking study” Contract reviews Effective contract reviews proved an enabler of development. (European) Metro A’s major outsourcing contracts for a Public Private Partnership required the development of incentives, measurement and reporting of all aspects of asset stewardship. This served as a significant catalyst to greater awareness of maintenance practices and effectiveness and was supported by extensive benchmarking to identify opportunities in comparison with current practice. New assets / technology platforms Several metros used the introduction of new assets as a catalyst for moving away from basic planned preventive techniques. This occurred due to the obsolescence of older techniques for new assets, through lack of equipment; lack of technical expertise in the workforce; and more ‘black boxes’ in technologically advanced assets. Evidence of new assets having this effect can be seen in (European) Metro F’s general asset and data management centre or and in (European) Metro G’s line-specific maintenance system, where a mix of new and different technologies led them to vary their conventional organisational approach to maintenance management. Shifts away from conventional practices also occurred when new assets were used to bring in new standards, or new maintenance planning regimes. It is essential that when new assets are brought in, old maintenance standards are not merely translated to them, but a full analysis is


20

carried out to streamline and optimise the maintenance process, whilst ensuring an acceptable level of availability and reliability. Asset information systems The major developments in asset information systems and information technology have been a critical factor in metros’ ability to adopt more mature maintenance management techniques that depend on detailed recording, understanding and knowledge of asset condition and performance and analysis of the impact that maintenance activities have upon these key outputs. Metros reported that new assets are increasingly being delivered with accurate real time Asset Condition Monitoring (ACM) systems which, combined with advanced diagnostic inspections and risk analysis, enables them to further eliminate unproductive maintenance interventions while maintaining, or improving, reliability. Making this change can be difficult and must be managed carefully. Some metros found that the sheer volume of information generated by ACM systems overwhelms staff at first, rendering them unable to identify the important messages in a deluge of minor fault codes. To avoid this, those staff who are going to be asked to work with new technologies and maintain new assets should be involved in the specification and planning process as early as possible. A formalised technique for challenging existing maintenance practices and institutionalising a level of awareness and preventive practice based on the metro’s own analysis is Reliability Centred Maintenance [31]. It demands highly accurate data, especially on the failure experience of existing assets, so asset information systems often enable the collection of such data. However, Sherwin raises a number of concerns regarding RCM in his review of maintenance models [11] and in his critique of it [32]. He is concerned principally that reliability (and efficiency in achieving it) whilst highly important should not be the sole aim of maintenance. This is reflected by placing it in Figure 4 as a key ‘Preventive technique based on metro’s own analysis’, but it would also have a place in a more holistic practice, which would balance this within wider reviews of overall process effectiveness.


21

MDBF: Car Kilometres Between Rolling Stock Failures (2008) 5

10.2 7.1

Million Car Kilometres per Rolling Stock Failure (> 5 Mins)

Metros using Reliabilty Centred Maintenance (RCM)

Unspecified or no RCM

4

3

2

1

0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

CoMET and Nova metros (Anonymised)

FIGURE 5

Mean Distances Between Rolling Stock Failures in Car Kilometres [33]

Figure 5 shows how among the 12 leading metros in terms of reliability, all but 2 use RCM, whereas of the 20 lagging metros, only 2 use RCM. This is not proof of a causal relationship or the effectiveness of RCM, but it is certainly a striking correspondence. 4.3 Adopting and sustaining ‘Expert’ maintenance practice A small number of metros were identified as having moved out of the ‘Planned Preventive’ zone, becoming expert in the deployment of predictive maintenance and implementing holistic change in their maintenance organisations for some or all of their asset classes. Condition Based Maintenance (CBM), which generally proved an essential stepping-stone for this development, builds on some form of ACM. When this monitoring was sufficiently frequent and thorough, CBM could take the place of normal planned preventive maintenance in certain cases. But in most cases, ACM is used as a trigger to fine-tune the timing of corrective or preventive maintenance [34], as well as asset replacement, using risk-based analyses to minimise failure effects at low cost. Despite the difficulties noted above in managing the information generated by Condition Based Maintenance systems, an international survey of 157 organisations in sixteen different industries found that surveyed organisations that had adopted CBM regarded it as a positive development. 77% of organisations surveyed reported that CBM had met or exceeded expectations and goals and only 4% of survey respondents reported a negative experience in the deployment of CBM [35].

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

22

Metros that presented more developed practices also employed more in-depth asset knowledge to undertake whole-life analyses when weighing up the costs and benefits of initiatives, thus maximising economies and minimising risks. Another critical characteristic of more expert maintenance practice was the culture of continuous improvement, including the mechanisms allowing this to happen. A good example of this is one metro’s mechanism for allowing shop-floor suggestions to be implemented quickly. This challenge of remaining expert is shown within the third zone of the Maintenance Management Framework. Organisations must have mechanisms in place to drive continuous improvement, to react to the information generated by ACM systems, and to continually review processes and practices as new information becomes available. Thus, an appropriate organisational structure becomes central to sustaining expertise and efficiency in maintenance. Where continuous improvement has been observed in action at CoMET and Nova metros, one of two general approaches has been taken to support this process:  

Specialist teams, challenged to make improvements and empowered to change working practices Clear client/delivery relationships that are structured in a way that drives ongoing improvement and changes.

The structure of (European) Metro O, for example, includes technical groups which constantly monitor and adjust maintenance practices, aiming to improve both efficiency and service reliability. Recently, the technical group noted that the regular “10,000Km” preventive periodic maintenance check for some rolling stock types was not finding many faults. Following analysis of the data, the inspection frequency was changed from 10,000Km to 15,000Km. At (Asian) Metro P, continuous improvement is supported by an explicit client/delivery relationship between operations and maintenance, with clear aims, targets and measures which provide the basis for ongoing evolution. With the operating department (the client) demanding that the maintenance department simultaneously improve the reliability of assets whilst reducing costs, the maintenance department is forced to continuously reappraise and renew their procedures to reflect the latest technologies and techniques.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

23

5. CONCLUSIONS A Maintenance Management Framework has been developed with specific reference to metros, linking together different characteristics and practices of metro management and analysis. This positions different techniques within broad ‘maturity’ bandings and also indicates associated key enablers, as well as potential barriers to change. The framework has potential value to metros to position where their practice is, identify opportunities for further development, and to understand possible results. The framework is supported by a selection of case study examples of metros’ experiences and achievements in implementing different techniques. Of the 17 metros analysed in this study, most metros have achieved valuable efficiencies through the employment of planned preventive maintenance techniques to improve elements of fixedplan maintenance regimes. A smaller number of metros have evidenced further development towards the potentially more significant opportunities arising from holistic regime review and change and / or the deployment of dynamic condition-monitoring-based maintenance, building on new opportunities provided within new assets and technology platforms linked to investment and the implementation of enterprise asset information systems. Leadership and the deployment of an organisation function with a specific remit to challenge the effectiveness of current practice, and to pursue continuous improvement, was the other key factor identified in metros that had matured and had adopted and were sustaining more expert maintenance management practices. The metro Maintenance Management Framework addresses a number of key deficiencies identified from a practical metro perspective in a review of previous literature. The surveyed metros have welcomed the framework as a practical tool and route map to support improvements in their maintenance management practices. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors thank the members of CoMET and Nova for their cooperation in the research project and willingness to share anonymised data and experiences with the wider transport industry and academic world.

Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

24

REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4.

5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

11. 12. 13.

14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

Kelly, A. and M.J. Harris, Management of industrial maintenance. 1978: NewnesButterworths. Pham, H. and H.Z. Wang, Imperfect maintenance. European Journal of Operational Research, 1996. 94(3): p. 425-438. CoMET, Key Performance Indicator Report. 2012. Mishra, R.P., G. Anand, and R. Kodali, Development of a framework for world-class maintenance systems. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems, 2006. 5(2): p. 141165. Moubray, J., Reliability-centered maintenance. 1997: Industrial Press Inc. Wireman, T., Developing performance indicators for managing maintenance. 2005: Industrial Press Inc. Campbell, J.D. and J.V. Reyes-Picknell, Uptime: Strategies for excellence in maintenance management. 2006: Productivity Pr. Waeyenbergh, G. and L. Pintelon, A framework for maintenance concept development. International Journal of Production Economics, 2002. 77(3): p. 299-313. Söderholm, P., M. Holmgren, and B. Klefsjö, A process view of maintenance and its stakeholders. Journal of quality in maintenance engineering, 2007. 13(1): p. 19-32. Campos, M.L. and A.C. Márquez, Review, classification and comparative analysis of maintenance management models. Journal of Automation, Mobile Robotics & Intelligent Systems, 2009. 3(3). Sherwin, D., A review of overall models for maintenance. Journal of quality in maintenance engineering, 2000. 6(3): p. 17. Dekker, R., Applications of maintenance optimization models: a review and analysis. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 1996. 51(3): p. 229-240. Valdez‐Flores, C. and R.M. Feldman, A survey of preventive maintenance models for stochastically deteriorating single‐unit systems. Naval Research Logistics (NRL), 1989. 36(4): p. 419-446. Pintelon, L.M. and L. Gelders, Maintenance management decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 1992. 58(3): p. 301-317. Aalbregtse, R., J. Hejka, and P. McNeley, TQM: how do you do it? Automation, August, 1991: p. 30-32. Vanneste, S. and L. Van Wassenhove, An integrated and structured approach to improve maintenance. European Journal of Operational Research, 1995. 82(2): p. 241-257. Kelly, A. and K. Eastburn, Terotechnology. A modern approach to plant engineering. Physical Science, Measurement and Instrumentation, Management and EducationReviews, IEE Proceedings A, 1982. 129(2): p. 131-136. Husband, T.M., Maintenance management and terotechnology. 1976: Saxon House. Parkes, D., Terotechnology Handbook. 1978: HM Stationery Office. Force, U.S.A., Army, and Navy, The TAAF Process. HQ AMC/QA, OASN S&L, HQ USAF/LE-RD, 1989. Bowles, J.B. and R.D. Bonnell. Failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis. 1995. Kelly, A., Maintenance Planning and Control. 1984, Oxford: Butterworths.


23.

24. 25.

26.

27. 28.

29.

30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

25

Campos, M.A.L. and A.C. Marquez, Modelling a Maintenance Management Framework Based on PAS 55 Standard. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 2011. 27(6): p. 805-820. Institute, B.S., 55-1: Asset Management. Part 1: Specification for the optimized management of physical assets. 2008: London. Zhao, Y., On preventive maintenance policy of a critical reliability level for system subject to degradation. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2003. 79(3): p. 301308. Marquez, A.C., et al., The maintenance management framework: A practical view to maintenance management. Safety, Reliability and Risk Analysis: Theory, Methods and Applications, Vols 1-4, 2009: p. 669-674. Nakajima, S., Introduction to TPM. 1988, Cambridge, MA.: Productivity Press. Trompet, M. and D.J. Graham. A Balanced Approach to Normalizing Bus Operational Data for Performance Benchmarking Purposes. in 91st Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. 2012. Washington. Garc a M rquez, F.P., F. Schmid, and . Conde Collado, A reliability centered approach to remote condition monitoring. A railway points case study. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2003. 80(1): p. 33-40. Antony, J., Some pros and cons of Six Sigma: an academic perspective. The TQM Magazine, 2004. 16(4): p. 303-306. Nowlan, F.S. and H.F. Heap, Reliability-centered maintenance. 1978, DTIC Document. Sherwin, D.J., A constructive critique of reliability-centered maintenance. Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 1999 Proceedings, 1999: p. 238-244. Findlay, N. and R.J. Anderson, Practices to Increase Peak Fleet Utilisation and Availability, RTSC, Editor. 2008, Imperial College London. p. 260. Budai, G., D. Huisman, and R. Dekker, Scheduling preventive railway maintenance activities. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2005. 57(9): p. 1035-1044. Higgs, P., Parkin, R. et al. A survey on condition monitoring systems in industry. in Proceedings of EDSA 2004, 7th Biennial ASME Conference Engineering Systems Design and Analysis. 2004. Manchester, UK.