Up Time Magazine- June/July 2008

reliability upload Root Cause Analysis The 10 Most Common Implementation Errors by Carlos J. Pernett R oot Cause Analysis (RCA) is a descriptive term employed in many industries to indicate the use of some form of disciplined methodology to determine the origin or source of a problem, incident, accident event, failure, etc. While the term is generic in the sense that there are many different methodologies in the marketplace, it does indicate a structured approach will be used in analyzing the cause and effect of a specific problem. The RCA discipline is a thought process that is not limited or constrained to a certain type of event to be analyzed. Its commonality is with the human thought process and understanding the use of logic to unravel the mysteries surrounding any undesirable outcome.1 When problem solving, most anyone would think it a mystery that a single process should follow different steps in a logic sequence to assure success. RCA is not an exception. Some think that RCA is simply a “Methodology.” However, when challenged with specific financial performance objectives related to ongoing maintenance and reliability issues, many engineers and corporations have adopted RCA as the “Process” of choice. After numerous years of employing RCA processes in different oil, gas, petrochemical and chemical operating environments, this author has discovered and documented reoccurring deficiencies in the discipline – herein referred to as “the 10 most common RCA implementation errors.” As illustrated in Figure 1, these 10 errors are related to every step of the RCA process. ERROR 1 – Triggers Are Not Based on Financial Objectives Problem Description – A common mistake in establishing RCA procedures is to base production triggers on the same downtime for all production lines. For example, a policy to “Execute an RCA every time any event has a downtime greater than 4 hours” means that the cost per hour for production losses is not taken into account and will be different for each production line. Additionally, the triggers do not take into account that every RCA procedure has a real and measurable cost attached to it. Therefore, if a failure is to be analyzed, the failure cost should be greater than the cost of conducting an RCA. Triggers are not based on financial objectives When the RCA is successful the RCA team is not rewarded The RCA effectiveness is not measured Show RCA Effectiveness 10 Deﬁne Triggers 1 When AU is affected all the 2 Record Events information needed is not Information recorded Measure RCA Effectiveness 9 8 The compliance Implement of all actions is Corrective Actions not assured The RCA results are not shared with other plants/fields RCA Process 7 5 Identify Root Causes Identify Events to Analyze 3 When the triggers are surpassed not all of the events are analyzed 4 The maintenance Review Why strategy is not Maintenance Strategy evaluated before Failed any RCA The RCA is not executed because it is not believed that the root cause is known Validate RCA Results 6 Execute RCA The Latent Root Causes are not identified Figure 1 - RCM Implementation Process and most common errors. 52 june/july 2008

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Up Time Magazine- June/July 2008

Up Time Magazine- June/July 2008 Contents Upfront Upclose: The True Cause of Most Machine Failures Information Technology: Finding Future Perfect Lubrication: Building an Oil Analysis Winner Maintenance Management: Hidden Ways to Increase Safety Infrared: Air Barriers Lower Energy Costs, Increase Profits Motor Testing: Efficient Motor Repair, Part Deux Precision Maintenance: Good Maintenance, Smart Maintenance Reliability: Common Errors in Root Cause Analysis Ultrasound: Avoid the Baghouse Blues Vibration: Don't Let Your Sensors Get Eaten Alive Upgrade: Lining It All Up

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.