WF22: Assess Maintenance Action (Back-Fit RCM)

Pre-requisites

• Maintenance Action Classification: classification following assessment of selected failure mode, which influences the decision logic of the Back-fit RCM Analysis (see WF21).

Detailed Descriptions (numbered steps)

1. Continue Back-fit RCM Analysis, following failure mode assessment and maintenance action classification.
2. Determine if maintenance action is applicable based on the rules outlined for the selected classification.
3. Determine if maintenance action could be modified to meet those applicability rules. If not, recommendation shall be RE-DESIGN.
4. Select the category of failure consequences to define, and include a narrative (optional).
5. Determine if maintenance action is effective in reducing risk of failure to an acceptable level.
6. Determine if maintenance action can be improved to form an effective task and reduce risk for failure to an acceptable level.
7. Define improvements to the maintenance action.
8. Define proposed maintenance action to conform with the change recommendation.
9. Continue through the Back-fit RCM Analysis process until all failure modes and associated maintenance actions are reviewed.
10. Review maintenance actions associated to all failure modes for the analysis, making any necessary changes.
11. Maintenance actions are assessed for all failure modes to conclude the Back-fit RCM Analysis.

Fields referenced in the diagram

• Define Failure Consequences: Safety/Environ. (Law), Operational Performance, All Others, Narrative
• Define Improvements: No Change, Delete Task, Modify Task, Add New Task, Re-Design, Other, Narrative
• Define Proposed Maintenance Action: Narrative

Decision points

• Action Applicable? — No → Modify to be Applicable? decision; Yes → Define Failure Consequences.
• Modify to be Applicable? — Yes → loop back to Define Failure Consequences; No → Recommendation: RE-DESIGN.
• Action Effective? — No → Improve to be Effective? decision; Yes → Define Improvements.
• Improve to be Effective? — Yes → loop back to Define Improvements; No → (proceeds with no effective task).
• All Failure Modes Reviewed? — No → Go To WF21 Step 3; Yes → Review Maintenance Actions.

Outputs

• Back-Fit RCM Analysis Report: A comprehensive report that details all steps of the analysis.

Screenshot walkthrough (captions/labels extracted)

Step 1: Continue Back-fit RCM Analysis

• "Back-Fit RCM - Fuel Tank": left nav NAVSEA Road Map, Maintenance Association, Back-Fit Summary. Top bar: Previous Failure / failure dropdown "Corroding of Lining due to Cavitation corrosion" / Next Failure / Recommendation "Continue Analysis". Tabs: 1. Identify Failure Mode / 2. Failure Assessment / 3. Classification (selected) / 4. Applicability / 5. Failure Consequences / 6. Effectiveness / 7. Improve Task / 8. Proposed Maintenance. Maintainable Item MTTF (hrs) "2,593.87", Time span (hrs) "1,000". "Maintenance Type Task" table (Name/Action/Circumstance/Typical Tasks/Evident): CONDITION-DIRECTED (CD) selected — "'Renew Life' (Restore or replace) Based on measured condition compared to standard." / "Equipment characteristics corresponding to failure mode." / "Diagnostic Test, Material Condition Inspection" / "Yes/No"; TIME-DIRECTED (TD) — "'Renew Life' (Restore or replace) Regardless of condition." / "Imminent wear out." / "Discard and replace with new item" / "Yes/No"; FAILURE FINDING (FF) — "Determine whether failure has occurred." / "Failure of off-line or 'hidden' function (e.g. safety/protective devices)." / "Inspection, Functional Tests" / "No"; SERVICING (S) — "Add/replenish consumable (e.g. Windshield washer fluid)." / "Reduced level of operating consumable." / "Top off consumables (e.g. fluids)" / "N/A"; LUBRICATION (L) — "Oil, grease or otherwise Lubricate." / "Accelerated wear." / "Lubricate" / "N/A".

Step 2: Action Applicable?

• "4. Applicability" tab: "Applicability of Existing Maintenance Action" — "Is the Existing Maintenance Action applicable?" Classified Maintenance Type "CONDITION-DIRECTED (CD)". "Select the Existing Maintenance Action that applies to this failure" — "Condition-directed Maintenance Actions are applicable only if: 1. An equipment characteristic corresponding to the specific failure mode can be identified. 2. The characteristic can be measured accurately and with consistency. 3. Sufficient time exists between the identification of potential failure and actual failure to take corrective action to prevent failure." "Is the Existing Maintenance Action applicable?" radio YES "The Existing Maintenance Action satisfies all of the applicability rules for the Maintenance Type." / NO "The Existing Maintenance Action does not satisfy all of the applicability rules. Evaluate whether the task can be modified to create an applicable Maintenance Action." Field "Explain why the Existing Maintenance Action is applicable:". "Can the Maintenance Activity be modified to meet the applicability rules?" radio YES/NO with field "Explain why the Existing Maintenance Action cannot be modified:". "Recommended Action": Recommendation "Continue Analysis". "Existing Maintenance Action" panel (right, empty): Maintenance Action, Description, Location of Maintenance, CCMR, Maintenance Type, Continuous Monitoring checkbox, Maintenance interval, Inspection interval; empty Maintenance/Inspection task table (ID/Task Name/Downti.../Duration (hrs)/Rate (USD/person/hr)/# Personnel/Total (USD)).

Step 3: Modify to be Applicable?

• Same tab with failure dropdown now "Blocking of Lining due to Buildup of debris", Maintainable Item MTTF (hrs) "2593.87", Time span (hrs) "8766.00". "Is the Existing Maintenance Action applicable?" = NO selected. "Can the Maintenance Activity be modified to meet the applicability rules?" = NO selected: "It is not possible to modify the Existing Maintenance Action to meet the applicability rules. The Proposed Maintenance Action will be set to No Maintenance Action." Recommendation "Continue Analysis". "Existing Maintenance Action" panel populated: Maintenance Action "001 - Breakdown Maintenance", Description "Breakdown Repair based on MCE Analysis 1", Location of Maintenance "Field", Maintenance Type "Breakdown - Repair", Maintenance interval "2593.870 hours", Inspection interval "N/A hours". Task table: 001 Detetection/Diagnosis (0.50, $100.00, 1, $50.00), 002 Removal (checked, 1.00, $100.00, 1, $100.00), 003 Repair (checked, 3.00, $100.00, 1, $300.00), 004 Reinstallation (checked, 1.00, $100.00, 1, $100.00), 005 Testing/Administration (checked, 0.50, $100.00, 1, $50.00).

Step 4: Define Failure Consequences

• "5. Failure Consequences" tab: "Determine whether the consequence of the failure being evaluated has a detrimental impact on safety of personnel, violates federal or state laws, or impacts the ability of the ship to perform its mission." Failure Consequences table (Name/Consequence): SAFETY / ENVIRONMENTAL (LAW) — "The consequences of the failure has a detrimental impact on safety of personnel or violates federal or state laws."; OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE — "The consequences of the failure has a detrimental impact on the performance of the mission or mission objectives."; ALL OTHERS — "The failure has consequences which are neither Safety/Environment(Law) or Operational in nature." Field "Failure Consequence Narrative:". Link "Go to step 6: Effectiveness". Maintainable Item MTTF (hrs) "2,593.87", Time span (hrs) "1,000".

Step 5: Action Effective?

• "6. Effectiveness" tab: "Determine whether the consequence of the failure being evaluated has a detrimental impact on safety of personnel, violates federal or state laws, or impacts the ability of the system to perform its mission." Maintainable Item MTTF (hrs) "2593.87", Time span (hrs) "8766.00". "Effectiveness for the Failure Consequence" — "Does it reduce the risk of failure (Pf x Sf) to an acceptable level?" radio YES "If the Rule for Effectiveness is satisfied, choose this option and explain how the task satisfies the rule." / NO "If the rule is not satisfied, choose this option and review the Road Map for 'Back-Fit' RCM for improvement options, and evaluate whether the Maintenance Action can be modified to establish an effective task." Field "Effectiveness Narrative:". "Can the Maintenance Action be improved to form an effective task?" radio YES/NO with field "Narrative:". "Recommended Action": Recommendation "Continue Analysis". "Existing Maintenance Action" panel: Maintenance Action "001 - Breakdown Maintenance", Description "Breakdown Repair based on MCE Analysis 1", Location of Maintenance "Field", Maintenance Type "Breakdown - Repair", Maintenance interval "2593.870 hours", Inspection interval "N/A hours". Same task table as Step 3.

Step 6: Modify to be Effective?

• Same tab: "Does it reduce the risk of failure (Pf x Sf) to an acceptable level?" = NO selected. "Can the Maintenance Action be improved to form an effective task?" radio YES/NO shown unset with placeholders. Recommendation "Continue Analysis". Same "Existing Maintenance Action" panel and task table as Step 5.

Step 7: Define Improvements

• "7. Improve Task" tab: Recommendation banner "NO CHANGE". "Maintenance Action Improvements" — "Based on the answers provided, the existing Maintenance Action is Applicable and Effective. Even though a task may be applicable and effective, it may still be a candidate for improvement. For example, its effectiveness can possibly be increased by age exploration." Radio options: NO CHANGE (selected) "Continue to perform the current Maintenance Action."; DELETE TASK "No longer perform the current Maintenance Action. No Maintenance Action will be used as the proposed Maintenance Action."; MODIFY TASK "Create a modified version of the current Maintenance Action as the proposed Maintenance Action."; ADD NEW TASK "Create a new Maintenance Action as the proposed Maintenance Action."; RE-DESIGN "Re-design the Maintainable Item to eliminate the possible failure or make it possible to maintain."; OTHER "Recommend other changes as described below." Field "Narrative:". Link "Go to step 8: Proposed Maintenance."

Step 8: Define Proposed Maintenance Action

• "8. Proposed Maintenance" tab: Recommendation "MODIFY TASK". "Change Recommendation": Change recommendation "MODIFY TASK" — "Create a modified version of the current Maintenance Action as the proposed Maintenance Action." with status icons: "The Proposed Maintenance Action conforms to the recommended change." / "The Proposed Maintenance Action does not conform to the recommended change." Field "Proposed Maintenance Narrative: Document the reason(s) for selecting the Proposed Maintenance Action:". "Maintenance Action Comparison" table (Existing/Proposed/Delta): Name "Breakdown Maintenance"/"Breakdown Maintenance"; Maintenance ID "001"/"001"; Maintenance Type "Breakdown - Repair"/"Breakdown - Repair"; Location "Field"/"Field"; Maintenance Interval (hrs) 2,593.87/2,593.87 (+0.0); Inspection Interval (hrs) N/A/N/A (+0.0); Maintenance Duration (hrs) 2.31/2.31 (+0.0); Maintenance Downtime (hrs) 2.31/2.31 (+0.0); Maintenance Man hours (hrs) 2.31/2.31 (+0.0); Maintenance Cost (USD) $1,000.05/$1,000.05 (+0.00); Inspection Duration/Downtime/Man hours (hrs) 0/0/0 all (+0.0); Inspection Cost (USD) $0.00/$0.00 (+0.00); Total Duration/Downtime/Man hours (hrs) 2.31/2.31 each (+0.0); Total Cost (USD) $1,000.05/$1,000.05 (+0.00). "Existing Maintenance Action" panel: Maintenance Action "001 – Breakdown Maintenance" with Copy... and New... buttons, Description "Breakdown Repair based on MCE Analysis 1.", Location of Maintenance "Field", Maintenance Type "Breakdown - Repair", Maintenance interval "2,593.870 hours", Inspection interval "N/A hours". Task table: 001 Detection/Diagnosis (0.5, $100.00, 1, $50.00), 002 Removal (checked, 1, $100.00, 1, $100.00), 003 Repair (checked, 3, $100.00, 1, $300.00), 004 Reinstallation (checked, 1, $100.00, 1, $100.00), 005 Testing/Administration (checked, 0.5, $100.00, 1, $50.00).

Step 10: Review Maintenance Actions

• "Maintenance Association" tab: "Maintenance Action Association" — "Assign the current and proposed Maintenance Actions to the Failure Paths. Multiple Failure Paths can be assigned the same Maintenance Action using the context menu options." Table (Failure Path/Current Action/Proposed Action/Duration delta/Downtime delta/Cost delta (USD)): Blocking of Lining due to Buildup of debris (No Maintenance Action / No Maintenance Action, $0.00), Corroding of Inlet due to Corrosive attack (No Maintenance Action / No Maintenance Action, $0.00), Corroding of Lining due to Cavitation corrosion ("001 - Breakdown Maintenance" / "No change proposed", $0.00, row highlighted), Corroding of Lining due to Corrosive attack, Interfering of Lining due to Buildup of debris, Perforating of Inlet due to Corrosive attack, Perforating of Lining due to Corrosive attack, Pitting of Inlet due to Corrosive attack, Pitting of Lining due to Cavitation corrosion, Pitting of Lining due to Corrosive attack, Seizing of Lining due to Buildup of debris (all No Maintenance Action / No Maintenance Action, $0.00 deltas). "Maintenance Action Assessment Summary" — "Back-Fit RCM - Corroding of Lining due to Cavitation corrosion": three paired bar charts comparing Current "001 - Breakdown Maintenance" vs Proposed "001 - Breakdown Maintenance": MTBM (2,593.87 hr vs 2,593.87 hr), Projected Total Cost ($8,766.44 vs $8,766.44), Projected Total Downtime (20.23 hr vs 20.23 hr).

Related workflows

• WF21 – Classify Maintenance Action (Back-Fit RCM)