Quality Progress - December 2017 - 55
Organizations strive to reduce costs by making their operations and
maintenance as efficient and effective as possible. They do everything they
can to minimize operating and maintenance costs while increasing performance and eﬃciency. To meet these high expectations, organizations are
resorting to a complete makeover of their equipment maintenance strategies.
When it comes or an organization's equipment, the organization typically
monitors and manages breakdowns, potential failures, planned maintenance
work and scheduling, parts and inventory, labor allocations and costing, for
example. In the past, these activities generally were managed using preventive maintenance (PM) techniques. Until the advent of predictive maintenance
(PdM) initiatives, PM was considered an eﬀective method for developing and
managing maintenance strategies, and resolving maintenance challenges.
Eventually, maintenance expenditures, repair timings, eﬃciency and relevancy of the planned repairs, productivity and competitiveness became more
demanding. Organizations wanted to further cut the overall life costs of their
equipment while also improving equipment performance. They also sought
more predictability and resilience from their equipment and assets. This is
where PdM led the charge.
What's the diﬀerence?
One of the fundamental diﬀerences between PM and PdM lies in the planned
maintenance intervals. PM relies heavily on the original equipment manufacturer's (OEM) recommended maintenance practices and parts overhaul intervals.
The OEM-recommended data on speciﬁc components, however, don't always
provide an accurate representation of the component performance for
qualityprogress.com ❘ December 2017