Operator Driven

Reliability (ODR)
The Definition, Scope, Limitations, Benefits, &
Positioning of ODR in the Maintenance World

Summary
This article discusses the concept of Operator Driven Reliability
(ODR), including its scope and limitations in relation to other
maintenance philosophies. The impact of new enabling
technologies is also reviewed. The paper ends with a description
of the ODR implementation process, including problems faced
MB01003
Mel Barratt and the benefits gained.
26 pages
March 2004

SKF Reliability Systems

@ptitudeXchange
5271 Viewridge Court
San Diego, CA 92123
United States
tel. +1 858 496 3554
fax +1 858 496 3555
email: info@aptitudexchange.com
Internet: www.aptitudexchange.com

Use of this document is governed by the terms

and conditions contained in @ptitudeXchange.
 Operator Driven Reliability

1 Definition..................................................................................................................................3

2 Scope of ODR...........................................................................................................................3
2.1 Factors that Influence the Scope of ODR ....................................................................4

3 Relation to Maintenance Philosophies......................................................................................6

3.1 Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) .........................................................................7
3.2 Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) ...................................................................9
3.3 Asset Management (AM)...........................................................................................11
3.4 Preventive Maintenance (PM) ..................................................................................11
3.5 Predictive Maintenance (PdM) ..................................................................................11

4 Setting Up an ODR Program ..................................................................................................13

5 Implementation Barriers .........................................................................................................14

5.1 Obstacles to General Inspection Activity ..................................................................14
5.2 Additional Frustrations ..............................................................................................15
5.3 Overcoming the Obstacles .........................................................................................17

6 Supporting Technologies ........................................................................................................17

6.1 Personal Digital Assistants (PDA).............................................................................17
6.2 Decision Support Systems .........................................................................................20
6.3 Compliance Standards ...............................................................................................21

7 Measuring ODR Results .........................................................................................................21

8 Key Players.............................................................................................................................22

9 Benefits of ODR .....................................................................................................................23

9.1 Disadvantages of ODR ..............................................................................................24

10 Conclusion .........................................................................................................................24

11 References..........................................................................................................................25

12 Table of Acronyms ............................................................................................................26

2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved 2


1 Definition
The term Operator Driven Reliability
(ODR) relates to maintenance practices that
are owned, managed, and performed by
operators. The term encompasses the
maintenance activities they perform, and the
interaction with maintenance and other
organization departments that impact plant-
wide reliability. These practices are often
preventive in nature and undertaken to
optimize equipment life cycle costs by
identifying opportunities for reliability
improvement. ODR is arguably a logical
extension of standard operating procedures
(sometimes a called equipment operating
procedures). [1]. These most commonly
originate from OEM at plant start-up and
frequently then undergo a process of evolution
in line with developing experience and
expertise in plant operation.
Process operators usually have at least some
interface with maintenance in so far as they
will typically request maintenance support to
investigate and correct suspect conditions that
they have detected (usually by subjective
means). Operators also become involved in
maintenance through their participation in
reliability-related activities such as root cause
failure analysis (RCFA) or maintenance
strategy review processes. A prime objective
of operator involvement in maintenance is
improvement of equipment support strategy.
Their involvement ensures that operations
staff understand and fulfill their role in
ensuring plant-wide reliability.
In some cases this operator involvement leads
to formal inspection activities being
established that are actually undertaken by the
operators. Arguably then operators are now
performing a basic maintenance activity. In
some organizations this idea of operator
performed maintenance [1] is extended to
include cleaning, minor adjustments, and even
simple preventive and corrective tasks that
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
were previously considered the responsibility
of the maintenance department.
Such activities are commonly categorized
under the collective term "operator-based
maintenance [2] which is employed to stress
the involvement of operators in maintenance
tasks. A parallel trend in the maintenance
world is the growth of reliability-improvement
technologies such as process control,
Computerized Maintenance Management
Systems (CMMS), and new generations of
handheld equipment [2]. Taking these trends
together, the term ODR emerged.
Operator Driven Reliability is then defined as
a company-wide, team-based process,
augmenting classic operator duties to optimize
the operation of industrial production plants.
ODR impacts equipment effectiveness by
contributing to optimal production and
financial return on investment. ODR
incorporates operational, technical, and
financial metrics to meet the business plan of
the industrial enterprise.
2 Scope of ODR
Given the complexity of modern production
machinery and associated support systems, it
is unrealistic to expect one person to be fully
conversant with all the skills necessary for
both plant operation and maintenance.
Therefore, efficient production must involve a
team of people who collectively provide
necessary skills and experience. Inevitably,
there must exist within the team specialists in
aspects of operations or maintenance.
Logically, the more sophisticated the plant,
the greater the need for these specialized
skills. The concept of operators participating
in maintenance activities is fundamentally not
new.
One example is the modern family car, which
is certainly a much more sophisticated
machine today than Henry Fords Model T! It
3

is still supplied with basic tools and
instrumentation to allow the operator to
undertake a degree of inspection and basic
maintenance. The specialist is only involved
when detailed skills or tools are required. It is
common that the operator (i.e. driver) is also
the owner of the machine. Therefore, he or she
is careful to ensure that the inspections and
maintenance tasks are properly done to
minimize running costs, and avoid the
inconvenience that occurs when the machine
breaks down. Consider the difference between
two vehicles both owned by the same
company; one is the executive car assigned to
an individual executive, the other is a pool car
driven by many, but owned by no one. Which
is most likely to be properly cared for and
serviced [3]?
It is feasible and desirable for operators to
accept some involvement and responsibility
for basic maintenance activities on
production plant.
Indeed, for some basic inspection activities the
operator may be the person best equipped, by
virtue of his experience, to perform the task.
After all, he patrols his part of the plant all day
and every day, and thus becomes sensitive to
minor changes in sounds and vibrations that
may not be apparent to someone lacking his
front-line experience. Similarly, if the operator
can be empowered to undertake simple
adjustment and repair tasks, then minor
defects can be corrected quickly.
What is essential to the success of an ODR
program is that it should go hand-in-hand
with a culture of ownership.
Some (arguably more enlightened) industrial
societies and organizations are fortunate that
the concept of plant ownership is a tacit,
inherent part of the workplace culture. In
other, less fortunate companies, the culture is
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
one of mutual blame. In some such cases, this
results in rigid lines of demarcation between
operations and maintenance. Companies
suffering from restrictive practices that result
from such attitudes have come to realize that
ownership and care of assets go hand in hand.
Tackling these limitations requires addressing
a number of attitudinal and organizational
issues [4].
An illustration of the interaction between
Maintenance and Operations / Production in
an ODR program is given in Figure 1.
2.1 Factors that Influence the Scope
of ODR
The cut-off level for operator involvement in
maintenance depends upon the local situation.
Operators involved in maintenance activities
of any kind need to know:
What constitutes a problem through
equipment knowledge and performance
standards?
What to do when each problem is
observed.
What not to do when each problem is
observed.
What tasks fall within the limits of
personal competence?
What tasks are outside the limits of
personal competence?
Obviously, safety is of paramount importance
and operators must be fully aware of any lock-
off or permitting procedures that apply. Some
inspection activities can require use of
specialized equipment. This may need special
skills, data, and/or interpretation skills. The
training and/or cost associated with wide
provision of such equipment may preclude
operators from participation in such inspection
activities.
4

Figure 1. Maintenance / Operations / Production Interaction.
Many routine inspections and simple
maintenance tasks are undertaken to satisfy
statutory or certifying authorities. In such
cases, there may be formal regulations that
need to be followed.
These will typically be concerned to ensure:
Work is carried out in a regular and timely
manner.
Competent personnel safely undertake
work.
Work is properly and accurately
completed.
Appropriate records are kept.
In some cases, these standards specify a level
of competence and/or qualification. The need
to satisfy these relevant authorities may
impinge on the degree to which operations
staff can be involved in basic maintenance and
inspection processes.
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
Some examples of regulatory bodies
applicable to basic inspection and simple
maintenance tasks are given here (for detailed
information please refer to the provided links).
FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION: 21
CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS,
Parts 210 and 211.
See: http://www.fda.gov/cder/dmpq
Part 210 - Current Good Manufacturing
Practice in Manufacturing, Processing,
Packing or Holding of Drugs; General
Part 211 Current Good Manufacturing
Practice for Finished Pharmaceuticals
INSPECTION OF REFINERY
EQUIPMENT (AMERICAN
PETROLEUM INSTITUTE)
See: http://api-ep.api.org/training
5

API 510, Pressure Vessel Inspection Code:
Maintenance Inspection, Rating, Repair, and
Alteration, Eighth Edition, June 1997.
Covers the maintenance inspection, repair,
alteration, and re-rating procedures for
pressure vessels used by the petroleum and
chemical process industries. Applies to
vessels placed in service that were
inspected by an authorized inspection
agency or repaired by a repair
organization.
Except as provided in the code, the use of
the code is restricted to organizations that
employ or have access to engineering and
inspection personnel or organizations that
are technically qualified to maintain,
inspect, repair, alter, or re-rate pressure
vessels. Pressure vessel inspectors must be
certified as stated in the code.
API 570, Piping Inspection Code: Inspection,
Repair, Alteration, and Re-rating of In-Service
Piping Systems, Second Edition, October
1998.
Covers inspection, repair, alteration, and
re-rating procedures for in-service metallic
piping systems. Establishes requirements
and guidelines that allow owner / users of
piping systems to maintain the safety and
mechanical integrity of systems after they
are placed into service.
Intended for use by organizations that
maintain or have access to an authorized
inspection agency, repair organization, and
technically qualified personnel. May be
used, where practical, for any piping
system. Piping inspectors are to be
certified as stated in this code.
RP 572, Inspection of Pressure Vessels,
Second Edition, February 2001 (ANSI/API
Std 572-2000).
Covers the inspection of pressure vessels.
It includes a description of various types
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
of pressure vessels and the standards used
for their construction and maintenance.
The reasons for inspection, the causes of
deterioration, the frequency and methods
of inspection, the methods of repair, and
the preparation of records and reports are
also covered. Safe operation is
emphasized.
RP 573, Inspection of Fired Boilers and
Heaters, First Edition, October 1991
(ANSI/API Std 573-1992).
Provides guidance on the inspection of
fired boilers and heaters. Promotes
proactive inspection procedures and
increasing overall equipment reliability
and plant safety.
UNITED KINGDOM HEALTH &
SAFETY EXECUTIVE
See: http://www.hse.gov.uk
Pressure Systems and Transportable Gas
Container Regulations, 1989.
NCSIIB National Certification Scheme for In-
service Inspection Bodies.
3 Relation to Maintenance
Philosophies
The preceding section of this document
outlines some of the reasons why operators are
unable to completely take over the
maintenance function. For this reason, ODR in
itself does not constitute a complete
maintenance solution for a plant. It should be
regarded as a complementary practice, which
frequently exists as a subset of one or more
packaged maintenance philosophies such as
Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) or
Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM).
ODR is a distinct group of activities that
makes things happen, rather than simply
suggesting what should happen.
6

Concepts such as TPM and RCM are often
referred to as programs. More accurately, they
are perhaps philosophies, which comprise a
program of individual practices within a
structured framework. The experience of
many companies suggests that, if properly
implemented, ODR is a versatile practice and
a valuable contribution to the success of the
program.
Of course, in many organizations the overall
maintenance strategy is less clearly defined,
and may be comprised of an amalgam of ideas
collected from various philosophies. However,
organizations do evolve and management
changes from time to time. In many cases the
incumbent maintenance philosophy represents
a combination of established ideas and
practices combined with aspirations for the
future.
3.1 Total Productive Maintenance
(TPM)
The TPM philosophy is built on the concept of
ownership and complete integration of
production and maintenance functions. The
prime driver for TPM is the concept of
Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE). The
philosophy hinges on making equipment
effectiveness the concern of everyone in the
organization, irrespective of his or her prime
function, experience, or expertise. OEE
requires strict attention to the measurement
and quantification of losses. ODR can make a
valuable contribution here by providing means
of capturing the impact of events as they
occur, which enables loss reporting to be a
continuous process. This can enhance the
credibility of OEE figures and improve
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
repeatability. Autonomous maintenance has
been defined as operators in independent
groups undertaking routine and preventive
maintenance. [5]
According to Kunio Shirose [6], the purpose
of autonomous maintenance is to teach
operators how to maintain their equipment by
performing:
1. Daily checks
2. Lubrication
3. Replacement of parts
4. Repairs
5. Precision checks
Like most lean manufacturing techniques and
tools, autonomous maintenance is based on
education and training. It focuses on raising
operator awareness on knowledge and
understanding of machine operation
principles.
To that purpose we will help them develop
four skills:
1. The ability to determine and judge if
operating conditions become abnormal.
2. The ability to preserve normal conditions.
3. A quick response to abnormalities by
repairing the machine or having a
technician respond.
4. Acknowledging when he/she does not
have enough knowledge, skill, or
resources to solve the problem.
7

Figure 2. The Seven Steps of Autonomous Maintenance [6].
Figure 2 outlines the seven steps of
autonomous maintenance. From figure 2 it is
observed that operator involvement in
maintenance and operator performed
maintenance activities sit comfortably within
this philosophy.
Operating as a subset of TPM, ODR
complements TPM by giving coordination and
direction to the activity, rather than allowing
an informal policy to develop whereby
Figure 3. The eight pillars of modern TPM.
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
individuals go around trying to do perceived
good things.
The Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance
describes autonomous maintenance as the first
of the eight pillars of TPM. An ODR program
spans more than one of these pillars, as shown
in figure 3. Indeed, it could be argued that
elements of ODR span all eight pillars, and
thereby help support the whole TPM structure.
8

For many companies, implementing a full
TPM philosophy is a long-term process, which
usually takes several years to achieve. TPM
frequently represents a fundamental cultural
shift that requires the whole organization to be
re-structured to align everyone with common
goals.
The lines of demarcation, which frequently
exist between maintenance and operations, are
the most obvious barriers to TPM
implementation. Recent years have seen many
companies move toward multi-skills in the
workforce as a means of overcoming this.
ODR may provide a useful ploy to introduce
multi-skills. ODR not only cuts across the
boundaries of operations and maintenance, but
also other functional barriers such as those
between mechanical, electrical, hydraulic, and
lubrication trades. For this reason, ODR can
provide one of the first small steps (foundation
/ structure) in the direction of adopting a TPM
philosophy and subsequent TPM program.
Summary
ODR does not need (it is not dependent upon)
TPM to exist, function, and succeed in
situations where classic TPM is absent.
Rather, ODR can be implemented in isolation.
Where TPM is pre-existing or planned, ODR
can admirably complement TPM by
provision of structure and support.
3.2 Reliability Centered Maintenance
(RCM)
The keystone of RCM is to develop
maintenance tasks and frequencies using the
functional redundancies designed into many
systems. With RCM, maintenance tasks and
task frequencies are developed to recognize
how each equipment item contributes to
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
maintaining system function. RCM can form
the basis for addressing operational
organizational issues [7].
In RCM, the plant is separated into its critical
components, each of which is subjected to a
detailed Failure Mode & Effect Analysis
(FMEA). The maintenance organization and
processes are then redefined based on the
results of that analysis. The objective is to
focus resources into activities and processes,
which has a direct impact upon plant
reliability, and to avoid wasted maintenance
effort. Some of the inspection and other
maintenance activities suggested by this study
are often categorized as ODR activities, in
which case ODR can be viewed quite
comfortably as a subset of the parent RCM
philosophy. Without FMEA or more rigorous /
complete RCM it is difficult to support, with
confidence, why ODR tasks are selected.
The RCM process (FMEA as a minimum) can
determine the nature and scope of the
individual ODR activities, and the frequency
with which they are carried out.
The interactions between other functions
within an RCM environment are shown in
Figure 4. It becomes evident that ODR can
also be a catalyst to introduce RCM / TPM
philosophies. ODR collects data, produces
results, and influences behavior. Thus it
provides the basic fuel required by TPM and
RCM programs, and enables maintenance
strategy review. The flowchart provides an
illustration of how an organization may
function. It is suggested that such cross-
functional business process mapping is a
useful exercise for any organization that seeks
to implement a robust ODR program.
9

Figure 4. ODR within RCM, information flow.
An interesting example of the relationship
between RCM and ODR is documented at
Mobils Beaumont Refinery [8]:
Success in Mobils refinery requires the
following:
1. Engaging both the top and bottom of
the organization. RCM and the top-down
process do a great job engaging the top
because leaders want to see that the focus
is on business results and not just
interesting technical problems. The
Manufacturing Game, action teams and
operational changes help get the front-line
enthusiastically on board. By getting your
operators and craft people involved, you
can quickly eliminate a lot of the nagging
defects and begin to change the culture.
2. Being action oriented. Previous efforts
had failed because we got into the
paralysis by analysis mode. The
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
equipment does not run better until you
take some action to improve it.
3. Using the data that we have. No data is
perfect, but it is often good enough to
point us in the right direction. If you wait
for the data to be flawless you will never
take action.
4. Including the union leadership was
critical. We were able to avoid an
unimaginable number of mistakes and
participation problems by having union
representation on the team from the start.
Union management relations have
improved along with reliability results.
5. Analyzing criticality is essential to
setting unit objectives. By using an RCM
approach that yields a quick assessment of
criticality we have shortened the time
required to start taking action on the most
costly problems.
10

6. Recognizing that reliability is a cross-
functional effort. The main costs of
unreliability are in the process. Many of
the defects come from the way equipment
is operated and can only be detected early
by the operators. If you cannot engage the
operating group in reliability improvement
there is not much point in continuing.
There is limited value that can be added
through only a maintenance function
approach.
Summary
RCM and MEA can provide the traceable
technical basis required by ODR. The
technical basis needs to be defined,
understood, and agreed upon for the ODR
program to be technically credible and robust.
Furthermore, an ODR program driven via
RCM / FMEA can form the technical
foundation for a TPM program. If ODR is
implemented (either within a TPM
environment or otherwise) without reference
to such schemes as RCM / FMEA it is
considered prudent to question the
justification, specification, and technical value
of the ODR tasks.
3.3 Asset Management (AM)
Asset Management refers to the organization
of the life of an asset to achieve lowest life
cycle cost with maximum availability,
performance efficiency, and highest quality
(maximum OEE). In other words, AM is the
systematic planning and control of a physical
asset throughout its life. An outcome of Asset
Management is the definition of specific
maintenance practices that need to be
undertaken combined with a consideration of
the optimum means of implementing them.
Therefore, it is likely that the process of AM
identifies that the optimum means of
undertaking certain maintenance activities is
assigning responsibility for those activities to
operations personnel. Thus, ODR can be seen
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
to operate as a direct subset of Asset
Management.
3.4 Preventive Maintenance (PM)
By definition ODR activities are typically
preventive in nature. Operator-performed
tasks are undertaken with the specific
intention of reducing downtime. ODR is
therefore an inherent subset of a Preventive
Maintenance philosophy.
3.5 Predictive Maintenance (PdM)
The relationship between Predictive
Maintenance (PdM) and ODR is somewhat
more difficult to define, as ODR can be a
subset of PdM, and PdM may be a subset of
ODR. In considering the relationship between
PdM and ODR keep in that some PdM
programs operate on a stand-alone basis,
whilst others operate as a subset of TPM /
RCM. PdM techniques also traverse the
boundaries between electrical and mechanical
disciplines, and PdM itself has sometimes
been used as a tool to aid the introduction of
multi-skills.
Many PdM programs focus on condition
monitoring using vibration monitoring and
analysis techniques [9]. These activities may
be undertaken by an in-house team or (perhaps
increasingly these days) through the use of an
outside contractor. In either of these situations
there is merit in employing some operator-
performed activity as a subset of the PdM
Program. Basic PdM tools are now available
for use within the competence of operations
staff. Equipping the operations staff in this
way allows them to undertake simple PdM
activity and make intermediate checks to
increase monitoring frequency. This avoids
the possibility of missing early signs of fault
development simply because the interval
between formal PdM checks is too long.
Operators can make a particularly valid
contribution in cases where outside
contractors are employed to undertake the
11

PdM activity. The frequency of their PdM
checks is often very limited by the service
charges incurred. Therefore, inclusion of an
ODR element as a subset of PdM activity
benefits both the contractor and the end user,
in that:
1. The end user achieves a higher level of
protection against unscheduled stoppages
without increasing his/her PdM service
charges, and at modest cost in terms of
equipment, training, and resources
required to undertake the additional
monitoring.
2. The contractor or internal PdM function is
protected from criticism that occurs in the
event of undetected faults.
3. In the event an alarm is generated by the
ODR activity the contractor may have the
opportunity to visit the site for a detailed
diagnostic study, which offers the
opportunity for him/her to gain additional
service revenue.
4. The involvement of operations personnel
in the PdM program improves the
relationship between the PdM provider
and (internal or external) customer, by
improving two-way dialogue regarding the
effectiveness of the activity.
In some cases the preferred method of
implementing PdM may be exclusively
through ODR. When a plant is comprised of a
number of small, simple machines, and
maintenance is essentially the replacement of
complete suspect units, the use of
sophisticated and powerful monitoring /
diagnostic equipment is difficult to justify. A
simple approach to PdM may be all that is
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
required to achieve the optimum lead-time for
planning maintenance activity. In this sense,
PdM may well comprise little more than
subjective inspection, and the operator is the
best-equipped person to undertake this task. In
other cases, the subjective inspection may be
complemented with simple PdM tools, which
are relatively inexpensive, easy to use, and
provide data that is simple to interpret.
Plant inspection and maintenance activities
undertaken by operators very often exceed the
boundaries of PdM activities to include safety
checks and general housekeeping duties. ODR
may also include simple maintenance tasks
such as minor adjustments, etc. PdM
frequently focuses on machinery whereas a
significant portion of ODR activity may relate
to vessels, pipe-work, valves, and other static
plant. In cases where ODR includes this
interface to Plant Integrity Monitoring then,
arguably, PdM becomes a subset of this
activity.
Sometimes objective PdM checks are included
as part of ODR to enhance the integrity of the
collected subjective data. There are cases
where operators are asked to take objective
readings from machines not only because the
readings themselves were of value, but also
because it provides means of ensuring that the
operator actually visited the machine. A more
modern solution to this problem is the use of
bar coding techniques, or employing another
type of electronic location ID that can be
detected by the inspection system.
In summary, the diagram given in Figure 5
attempts to show the relationship between
these various facets of maintenance
management.
12

Figure 5. Relationship of ODR to other philosophies and practices.
4 Setting Up an ODR Program
ODR is nearly always part of a generally
applied maintenance plan: a distinct group of
activities that makes things happen, rather
than simply suggesting things should happen.
The following steps are suggested to set up an
ODR program:
1. Start with an overall strategic maintenance
plan like TPM, RCM, or AM, and include
defined goals / objectives for ODR within
this plan.
2. Understand that ODR is a deliberate
process for gaining commitment by
operators to:
Keep equipment clean and properly
lubricated.
Keep fasteners tightened.
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
Detect symptoms of deterioration.
Provide early warnings for
catastrophic failures.
Make minor repairs (with the proper
training).
Assist maintenance make selected
repairs.
3. Start with necessary communication
between maintenance operators and total
operation to gain commitment and internal
cooperation.
4. Clean the equipment to like-new
condition, make minor repairs, and
develop a list of major future repairs.
5. Utilize leadership driven, self-managed
teams (e.g. a reliability improvement
team).
13

6. Develop a written and specific team
charter.
7. Have teams evaluate / determine the best
methods for operator cleaning, lubrication,
inspection, minor repairs, and level of
support during repairs.
8. Develop written procedures for operators
and include them in quality &
maintenance guides (standard operating
procedures).
9. Evaluate the current predictive and
preventive maintenance procedures and
include those that operators are capable of
performing.
10. Document start-up / operating / shutdown
procedures along with setup / changeover
practices.
11. Consider quality control and HSE (Health,
Safety and Environment) requirements.
12. Document operator training requirements
and maintenance support.
13. Develop operator certification to validate
operator-performed tasks.
5 Implementation Barriers
Probably the most common ODR
implementation problem is the involvement of
operators in general plant inspection activities.
There are some specific issues that arise when
operators undertake these tasks. Thus we need
to remember the basic pitfalls that can befall
such an inspection program, irrespective of
whether it is an ODR or maintenance function.
5.1 Obstacles to General Inspection
Activity
Of course, there is nothing new about this kind out these routine inspections is often a tedious
of inspection activity. Many planned
maintenance programs (computerized or
otherwise) rely heavily on written feedback
from the guy at the sharp end of consuming activity, which requires someone
maintenance. This is also the rock upon which
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
many such programs have foundered.
Experience suggests a number of reasons why
fitters and operators do not like writing things
down.
In most companies, at least some part of the
maintenance workload involves correction of
faults caused by bad maintenance (Iatrogenic
failures). These occur for a number of reasons
including:
The task was not properly scoped.
The instructions were not properly
followed.
Recommended parts were not available so
an alternative was used.
Therefore, inspectors (maintenance or
production operatives) are reluctant to report
such matters.
The inspector may be wary of the commitment
implied by a written report. Even the author of
an unsigned report may possibly be
recognizable through his handwriting. Indeed,
experience also shows many instances where
an inspectors poor literacy skills are a source
of embarrassment.
Disciplined inspection activities based on a
paperwork approach also carry a number of
other associated problems. Production and
distribution of the required inspection forms is
often viewed as tedious and time consuming.
However, failure to have required forms
available for use when needed by the inspector
has a de-motivating effect.
Prompt analysis and reaction to collected data
is also critical to program success. Carrying
task, and is made more so if the inspector feels
that no one is making use of the data.
Analyzing collected data is often a time
to manually scan written reports, observe
recorded faults, and arrange appropriate
14

responsive action. There is also a large scope
for error. Failure to observe and react to a
reported fault means that the effort invested in
carrying out the inspection has been wasted.
A truly effective program needs to include a
feedback mechanism that provides the
inspection staff with acknowledgement of
reported faults and indicates planned action.
This effectively illustrates the value placed on
the activity by management, and is of great
help in maintaining motivation levels.
The quality of the collected data by such a
system is sometimes questionable. If the
inspection staff views this as a low-priority
activity that is poorly audited by supervisory
staff, then the integrity of the data suffers.
Inspections often are not thorough, and in
some cases they arent done at all. The
inspector simply completes his checklist with
what he usually sees. This practice is known
by a variety of terms including flogging the
log, pencil whipping, WD40
Maintenance. ODR routines may be
structured to minimize the possibility of this
occurring. Techniques employed might
include:
A requirement in the inspection routine for
collection of objective data, which
requires specific instruments, gauges, etc
to be read.
A requirement within the routine that the
inspector evaluates the data against set
limits and has responsibility for any
appropriate remedial action.
Techniques such as bar-coding and other
means of electronic location tagging may also
be employed to overcome this problem.
Thus, the process of undertaking such an
inspection program is a cycle of individual
tasks.
This type of maintenance activity is frequently
viewed as a benefit of the maintenance
department rather than a benefit for the good
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
1. Prompting and facilitating the inspection
2. Inspecting the machines and recording
observations.
3. Taking corrective action if it is within the
inspectors field of competence.
4. Analyzing collected data and arranging
responsive action (usually a maintenance
function).
5. Providing inspection staff with feedback
from the activity .
Although the overall activity is of high value,
each of the individual cycle steps may be
regarded as tedious. However, failure to
perform any one of these in a disciplined
manner (regularly, thoroughly and promptly)
will ultimately lead to a collapse of the
inspection program.
5.2 Additional Frustrations
Attitudinal issues
Increasingly, maintenance managers seek to
involve operations personnel in these
inspection activities. These people already
patrol the plant regularly as part of their
operations duties. Indeed, their familiarity and
experience with the plant can be a great asset
to the inspection program as they are usually
very quick to spot abnormal features such as
strange noises, raised temperatures, etc.
Unfortunately, it isnt always easy to harness
this experience. An inspection program
involving operations staff will be prone to the
pitfalls previously discussed, plus several
others.
There may exist very real cultural and
organizational barriers to the introduction of
such a program. The situation is compounded
even further when the operator is expected to
undertake more than just inspection.
15
 Operator Driven Reliability

of the company. Gaining the interdepartmental be assured that his immediate supervisors
co-operation required for success may require support the program, lest their instructions and
addressing a number of political issues within directives conflict. The operator may also be
the company. suspicious of managements true reason for
instigating such a program. Is this program
The competence of operations staff to really a covert version of the watchmans
undertake such activities may be called into clock? Is management really trying to verify
question. Sometimes, an attempt to introduce the operator walks the plant regularly? If
such activities may bring old prejudices to the management is suggesting that the operator
surface. Some operations staff may be has time to do this additional activity are they
mistrustful of managements true motivation then suggesting that hes currently under-
for introducing the program, and there is employed? Is the operators job security at
always, of course, some degree of resistance risk?
to change.
Organizational Issues
The Maintenance Attitude
All too often senior management views
The maintenance craftsman is often skeptical maintenance as a function that adds cost to the
regarding the viability of such a program. He organization, whilst production adds value.
may question the willingness of the operations Maintenance is often viewed as a necessary
staff to participate in the program. His past evil; it functions when the plant doesnt [4].
experience may suggest to him that operations
have a cavalier attitude towards the Unfortunately, there does exist within many
machinery, and that many machinery companies a culture of blame. Poor quality
problems result from the race to achieve daily maintenance and consequent disruption is
output targets irrespective of cost or often cited by production management as the
consequences in terms of machine damage. He prime reason for non-achievement of
will also question the competence of the production targets. Similarly, maintenance
operations staff to undertake the work since management often complains that production
they lack his technical training and management doesnt allow access to the plant
experience. The fear may exist that they will for routine maintenance, hence the high level
do more harm than good. Underlying this may of unscheduled downtime.
be the fear that tasks that were traditionally
the responsibility of the maintenance team are In many organizations maintenance &
being delegated elsewhere to reduce job operations function virtually independently of
positions. each other, each with separate objectives and
structures. Small wonder then that dialogue
The Operations Attitude between maintenance and operations founders
Similarly, the process operator may not have because of hidden agendas [4].
trouble finding excuses for his non-
Successful implementation of an operator
participation. He is, of course, a busy man. He
based inspection program requires an
simply doesnt have time to do maintenance
understanding that the activity benefits all
jobs. Anyway, why should he? Will he be
parties. It requires that management buy into
paid any more for his trouble? His pay may
the program from the top down.
well be based (at least in part) on achievement
of production targets, so any operational
problem will inevitably take precedence over
these non-productive activities. He needs to
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved 16

5.3 Overcoming the Obstacles
Overcoming these issues requires individuals
to fully recognize and respect the skills and
experience of other parties. Any disputes need
to be discussed and settled in an environment
of courtesy and co-operation, with all parties
contributing to discussions in a frank and
honest manner. The program needs to be
implemented in an atmosphere of enthusiasm
and excitement for the program and
organization [4].
On a practical level, modern computer
technology can be employed to overcome
some practical difficulties by facilitating a
two-way interface between maintenance and
operations. However, unless the underlying
organizational culture is one of ownership,
then it is unlikely that investment in this area
will achieve its optimum return.
6 Supporting Technologies
Most ODR systems are paperwork driven. In
the case of maintenance tasks it is the job card
(produced manually or by a Computerized
Maintenance Management System) that
usually informs the operator of a task that
needs to be done. It also provides a
mechanism for providing him/her with the
step-by-step procedure for achieving the
requested task.
A detailed checklist often accompanies (or
replaces) the job card. This prompts the
operator to inspect particular aspects of the
plant.
Frequently, a conscientious operators
reported findings include some unexpected
observations, which are typically entered in a
comments section of the document. Very often
these comments are of prime importance since
they represent out-of-the-ordinary occurrences
worthy of further investigation or corrective
action (e.g. whilst undertaking inspection of
specified aspects of a machine, the operator
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
may notice a serious safety hazard such as
walkway or handrail fault, or some other
critical safety issue, outside the scope of the
specified inspection).
6.1 Personal Digital Assistants (PDA)
A large number of Personal Digital Assistants
(PDAs) offer the possibility of a dramatic
reduction in the paper flow associated with
ODR activities. They also provide an easier
transfer of information to, from, and between
computer systems for improved two-way
communications between maintenance and
operator.
The choice of PDA hardware is large [10], and
includes instruments from companies such as
Compaq, IBM, Hewlett Packard, Diagnostic
Instruments (DI), SKF, Symbol, 3Com, Psion,
Epson husky, etc. Some are essentially DOS-
based, while others use Windows CE or
proprietary operating systems. Some PDAs
are stylus-driven; others have keypads. Some
are ruggedized to facilitate their use in harsh
environments. Some are also designed to
conform to safety certifications such as the
CENELEC approval required by the European
petrochemical industry.
Hardware is only part of the requirement. The
PDA needs to be interfaced to the
maintenance management process, which
requires applications software. Here the
choice is limited. Much of the application
software currently employed for ODR
activities is either designed for, or evolved
from, data collection systems intended for use
by process or maintenance personnel. Thus,
many of the systems currently available do not
fully address the requirements of an ODR
application.
In such cases, application packages are
primarily designed for data collection in the
form of objective values or subjective
comments. There tends to be an assumption
that checks are made while a plant is
17

operating, and indeed that the plant needs to
be operating for the check to be carried out.
The situation is different when plant
inspection becomes an ODR function.
Figure 6. Examples of Modern Personal Digital
Assistants (PDAs) from Diagnostic Instruments Ltd.
In this kind of data collection system there are
three types of data:
Static Data - usually represented by simple
values (temperatures, pressures, flow
rates).
Dynamic Data - requires further
processing to become meaningful. The
principle example of this is recording the
output from a vibration sensor.
Subjective Inspection data - textual in
nature and often entered by selecting
single or multiple options from a list.
Typically, static and dynamic data requires
machinery to be operating to collect data. The
subjective data associated with an ODR
inspection routine often includes observations
taken from static items, or machines not
operating.
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
Examples are:
Tank levels
Condition of pipe-work and cabling
General housekeeping (tidiness) checks
Still further inspections may require that the
machine is not operating to facilitate their safe
undertaking. Examples include:
Checking valve hand-wheels to ensure
they are not seized and are free to fully
operate
Detailed inspection of guards
Checking tightness and condition of drive
belts or chains
The various combinations of machines that
operate at any given time further compound
the problem of building inspection routes.
Very often the process operator does not know
whether a machine is operating when he
arrives to carry out his routine inspection. In
many (though not all) situations process
requirements preclude the possibility of
machines being switched either on or off
simply to facilitate routine inspection activity.
As PDAs become more sophisticated and
powerful new possibilities open up for their
application in ODR. The PDA may find
application for issuing work instructions,
which effectively replaces the job card. Step
by step instructions could be presented to the
operator to guide him through safe
implementation of simple procedures. The
operator would not receive the next instruction
step without first confirming completion of
the present action. On-line help systems might
provide access to relevant supplementary
information such as:
Parts lists and store catalogue numbers
Detail Drawings
18

Floor plans to aid machine location
Sketches to aid identification / location of
valves, gauges etc.
Instructions for action required in out of
limit situations
Active equipment operating procedures
Shift-end hand-over reporting / PM close-
out
It is the nature of microprocessor technology
that with time, computing power and memory
capacity become more affordable. The modern
PDA is becoming as flexible as the PC. This
means that individual instruments dont need
to be dedicated to a specific function (e.g.
plant inspection). PDAs are already available
with sufficient power and capacity to hold
multiple application packages. It is likely the
PDA and its derivatives will become as
indispensable as a PC or laptop.
A school of thought already exists within
some organizations that, if the PDA is the
personal property of an individual (rather than
simply being associated with a process or
function), and it is friendly and versatile its
indispensability becomes its protection (the
concept of ownership). If an individual can be
encouraged to place enough value on the unit
then he will take care of it. Thus the need for
ruggedized industrial versions (with their
associated premium costs) disappears.
PDAs have on-board computing power, which
means that calculations can be made based on
collected data. The resulting value can
immediately be compared with tolerance
values. The operator is then alerted to out-of-
limit conditions. Examples of this include:
The calculation of efficiencies, based on
measurements taken of a machines inputs
and outputs
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
The scatter of exhaust temperatures from a
marine diesel engine
Irrespective of the data entry method the
modern PDA provides an excellent means of
gaining textual feedback from the operator
without asking for written reports.
Data entered in a PDA is arguably more
secure than data collected on a clipboard, as
the PDA data doesnt get soiled when the unit
is placed in a less-than-clean location.
The PDA may also offer enhanced integrity of
data in a variety of ways:
It may be so configured that it will not
accept invalid (i.e. outside specified range)
data.
Data may be date / time stamped, which
eases correlation with data from other
sources.
Standardization of terminology (i.e.
always reporting pump leaks as opposed to
sometimes reporting leaking pumps)
makes data analysis easier.
Techniques such as bar coding may be
employed to ensure data corresponds with
location.
Although PDAs are now in common use in a
variety of areas, their application for plant
inspection activities is still relatively new.
Introduction of the PDA as an inspection tool
does, therefore, carry a certain novelty
value. Experience shows that this is very
short-lived, and that the novelty value alone is
not sufficient to overcome the other potential
pitfalls associated with plant inspection
activity.
Logic suggests that data collection time
required by a properly configured PDA
system should be similar to that required by
clipboard and pencil. Perhaps the most
significant benefits from such a system come
19

from the easier data analysis that such a
system facilitates. Typically, a PDA unit will
off-load to a host software package, which
makes provision for management of the
inspection activity, and for storage and
analysis of collected data. This eliminates the
need for routine production and distribution of
paper checklists. Moreover, the inspection
system is available for use by the inspector at
any time. A well-designed host system offers
a comprehensive range of reports, the purpose
of which is to transform the collected data into
meaningful information upon which
maintenance decision-making is based. The
system needs to provide a flexible report
package for a variety of data. The
requirements for reporting the numeric data
collected (gauge readings, etc.) is very
different from the manner in which subjective
(textual) inspection comments are handled.
Report automation eliminates the need for
manual data scanning and reduces the
associated scope for errors.
In a production environment machinery
operates at varying speeds and loads, which
has a significant effect on both static and
dynamic data. This complicates the data
analysis process unless the host software
provides tools for compensation. Such tools
include:
Data normalization techniques
Use of statistical analysis
State-dependent alarms
Filtering techniques to allow like-for-like
data for trending and analysis
The modern PDA approach to plant inspection
does overcome many of the practical issues
associated with plant inspection activity.
Ultimate success however, still requires the
team to overcome organizational and
attitudinal issues. A general culture of
ownership and team spirit must persist
throughout the organization.
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
6.2 Decision Support Systems
The advent of decision support software is
further enabling technology for ODR. These
are sometimes referred to as Knowledge-
based, Rule based, or Expert systems. These
systems effectively allow the operator
immediate access to maintenance advice and
instruction, without referring to his
maintenance colleagues, thus providing the
operator more autonomy. At the same time,
use of such systems precludes the possibility
of the maintenance staff becoming overloaded
with spurious alarms that result from operator
inspection and maintenance activities.
The decision support systems that are
currently available vary considerably in their
scope and versatility. Some are dedicated to a
particular aspect of maintenance activity.
Others may accommodate varied inputs such
as inclusion of monitoring parameters, or
perhaps subjective inspection data. Some
systems include only a generic rule-base and
restrict their output to a fairly general
diagnosis of the developing fault. More
sophisticated systems incorporate a significant
degree of Failure Mode and Effect Analysis
into the construction of the rule base, and
possibly allow a degree of customization to
match the characteristics of a particular plant.
This enables decision support systems to
strengthen automated fault diagnosis with
recommended remedial actions. These
recommendations may include corrective
maintenance activities and adjustments to
plant operating conditions to allow machine
operation while organizing remedial action.
Some systems rely on an interactive question
and answer interface with the user. The user
manually enters a symptom, and the system
presents a series of related questions that the
user may (or may not) answer. Based on the
amount and accuracy of the information
provided by the user, the system may make a
fault diagnosis and support the diagnosis with
recommended action. The diagnosis and
20

recommended action may be in the form of a
screen display or printed report.
More sophisticated systems interface directly
with other software packages that are
employed to monitor and maintain the plant.
For example, the system may automatically
interrogate the condition monitoring database,
assess the nature and severity of a developing
fault, and interface directly with the CMMS
(Computerized Maintenance Management
System) to instigate remedial action. It may
also incorporate a method of incident capture,
which allows plant problems to be logged for
later historical analysis.
6.3 Compliance Standards
The introduction of electronic record keeping
and electronic signatures has seen the
emergence of standards that ensure data held
in electronic format is secure and free from
unauthorized modification. This protects the
audit trail and verifies that work is completed.
Data in open database files or spreadsheet
format may be accessible and open to
unauthorized tampering.
Example: Food and Drug Administration 21
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 11.
See: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/
7 Measuring ODR Results
A successful ODR implementation can
impact:
Plant availability problems are detected
sooner and corrected quickly
Plant efficiency improved reliability
means the plant is more likely to achieve
its optimum output rate
Product quality when dependent on
consistent plant performance
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
The product of these three parameters is the
Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE);
thus ODR directly affects the OEE figure.
Furthermore, this figure can usually be related
to hard cash benefit as shown in the following
example.
In his paper How Reliability Affects
Earnings per Share [11], Keith Burres of
HSB Reliability technologies outlines savings
achieved as a direct result of ODR. The
quoted example relates to prevention of pump
cavitations that typically resulted in 88 hours
of downtime per year. Optimization of the
lubrication frequency resulted in a production
increase of 16,000 tons in the first year. The
operator focus on reliability also led to an
improvement of 30,000 tons in the first-pass
quality product, and Overall Equipment
Effectiveness (OEE) rose from 85% to 89%.
These achievements are summarized in
financial terms as follows:
Base year sales at 85% OEE were
$1,236,500,000.
Each percentage point of OEE is valued at
$15,135,000.
A 4% improvement in OEE equates to an
improvement in sales worth $60,520,000.
Other conventional maintenance KPIs could
also be employed. For example:
Total maintenance costs
Maintenance costs for particular types of
plant
MTBF figures
However, in situations where ODR is not the
only current maintenance initiative it might be
difficult to relate such figures directly to ODR
performance. More specific indicators to
monitor the take-up and effectiveness of an
ODR program might include:
21

Monitoring the percentage completion
rate of scheduled operator performed
activity. Because this activity is often
secondary to the principal process control
duties there may be a tendency, on the part
of the operator, to seek excuses.
Measuring the number of completed routes
or the percentage of completed scheduled
activities may help control this (making
this a competitive issue, perhaps between
shifts, may be an inducement to more
active participation in the program).
Maximizing this number indicates
program acceptance by operations staff,
and a willingness to participate.
Monitoring the increase of maintenance
work orders in direct consequence of
ODR activities. Work orders will only be
raised following investigative action by
maintenance against reported faults. Thus,
an increase in this number logically
indicates a higher level of alertness and
care on the part of the operators.
Monitoring the number of spurious
alarms generated by ODR activities.
Over zealous inspection may damage the
credibility of the program. Maintenance
staff may begin to doubt the worth of
operator involvement if they are constantly
being summoned to investigate trivial
matters of little consequence. Care needs
to be taken with this. A decrease can mean
a more realistic approach by operators, or
an inadequate level of care.
Monitor the number of stoppages /
production loss caused by faults that
should be picked up by operator-
performed activities.
Monitor the time spent by operators
doing corrective / preventive work
within their level of competence and
authority (not including inspection
activity).
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
It is important to remember that ODR is not
simply the delegation of simple maintenance
and inspection activities by maintenance to
operations personnel. ODR should foster a
closer, more productive liaison between the
functions. Both parties are meant to benefit.
Therefore, it is important that the combination
of KPIs employed indicates the two-way
nature of the process. Their use should not
create the impression that ODR simply
represents an additional burden on operators.
Additional KPIs may therefore include:
The promptness with which maintenance
staff acknowledge and react to operator
reported problems. This is an important
parameter with a direct bearing on
operator motivation levels.
Monitoring the number of production
stoppages / production loss caused by
operator reported faults that are not acted
upon by maintenance.
Monitoring time spent by maintenance
staff working alongside operators to aid
operator understanding. Joint discussion of
problems and potential solutions aid each
party to gain a better understanding of all
problems and concerns, and hence
facilitate improved future cooperation.
It is important that all participants (i.e.
maintenance staff, operations staff, and
management) are aware of, and understand,
the KPIs employed. Care should be taken to
ensure that the reporting and discussion of
these statistics is undertaken in a constructive
manner. This is not to be a finger pointing
contest.
8 Key Players
There are numerous suppliers of hardware,
software, and consulting services who are
active in this field. For many companies, ODR
is one facet of a comprehensive package.
Identification of a definitive suppliers list is
precluded by the fact that most do not describe
22

themselves as either being (or including) ODR
systems. This makes the key players difficult
to identify via Internet search engines.
Most modern Computerized Maintenance
Management Systems include ODR
capability. Many also offer an interface to
hand-held computing equipment, which can
be employed within the scope of an ODR
program.
The majority of computerized PdM systems
(especially those centered on vibration
technology) allow collection of a wide range
of measurement parameters, and facilitate
collection of subjective plant inspection data.
The ease of use of most modern systems
makes them well suited to application within
an ODR environment. Such systems do,
however, tend to be centered on inspection-
type activities rather than the wider aspects of
ODR.
There are countless consultancies active in the
field of maintenance strategy analysis and
implementation. Many feature ODR as an
integral (though often tacit) part of their
considerations and offerings.
9 Benefits of ODR
In 2001, the fifth annual census of
manufactures was conducted by IndustryWeek
journal. It attempted to rate the effectiveness
of various manufacturing processes. Of the
companies who responded, 69.9% indicated
that Operator-based Maintenance was
somewhat effective while 24.6% rated it as
extremely effective [12].
Successful implementation of an ODR
program has benefits for maintenance,
operations, and the organization. Maintenance
benefits because it releases their time to
participate in more productive reliability-
related activities. This offers personal reward the potential consequences that may result if
in the sense of improved job satisfaction, and developing faults are ignored. Experience
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
the benefits that accrue to the organization as
a result of reliability improvements.
Improved machinery care through greater
operator involvement means developing
problems are spotted sooner, as the operator is
always present, alert, competent, and prepared
to undertake or instigate corrective actions.
Empowering operators forces them to know
their equipment more intimately [13].
The improved liaison between maintenance
and operations also ensures that problems
detected by ODR that fall outside the
competence of the operators are quickly
responded to.
Early detection of developing problems and
prompt corrective action means that
consequential damage to plant, disruption to
output, or degradation of product quality are
minimized.
Operators are usually measured, and
frequently rewarded through target output
achievement. Therefore, scope exists for a
direct financial benefit in consequence of
successful ODR implementation.
Additionally, their enhanced control over
minor plant stoppages allows them more
direct influence on their own earning
potential. In consequence a higher level of job
satisfaction may result.
ODR also helps get maintenance basics right.
Going back to the car analogy theres little
point in booking the next service at the main
dealer, if the engine is about to seize because
no one looked at the dipstick lately.
A successful ODR program can also have a
significant impact upon safety and
environmental issues. The improved dialogue
between maintenance and operations
personnel leads to an increased awareness of
shows that plant safety and good maintenance
23

go hand in hand. Improved awareness of
minor problems, and speedier rectification
eliminates numerous minor hazards. For
example, a quicker response to a minor
leakage, perhaps even performed by the
operator, avoids the risk of fluid on the floor
and the associated risk of slipping. Improved
maintenance often results in lower plant noise
levels. This improves the working
environment for plant operators and, in some
cases, impacts outside the boundaries of the
plant. This is particularly true where
predictive activity incorporates vibration
monitoring, as there is a close correlation
between plant vibration levels and radiated
noise. Critical plant failure, especially where
machinery is involved directly with effluent
treatment or other plant emission controls, can
have serious environmental consequences,
which often leads to severe penalties.
Therefore, the improved alertness generated
by an effective ODR program can pay
dividends here also.
The improved two-way dialogue between
maintenance and production has a knock-on
effect on other areas of maintenance. This
facilitates earlier identification of reliability
issues, more informed and timely discussion
regarding possible solutions, and easier
implementation of corrective activities.
9.1 Disadvantages of ODR
The main disadvantages of ODR from
inadequate preparation prior to
implementation. An ill-conceived ODR
program implemented without adequate
cultural and organizational preparation can be
very divisive. It may broaden any existing
divisions between operations and maintenance
by providing both sides with more stones to
throw at each other.
Failure to clearly define the division of
responsibilities between maintenance and
operations could result in either:
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
Conflicts that arise from effort duplication
(why are you doing that? Ive already
done it!)
Plant problems due to critical activities left
undone (I thought they did it!)
10 Conclusion
At the outset of this discussion, ODR was
described as a logical extension of operator
involvement in maintenance and the
performance by operations staff of basic
maintenance activities. It is difficult to
imagine any production or processing plant
without some element of operator involvement
in maintenance. They invariably request
maintenance work, and (though sometimes
reluctantly) make machines available for
required maintenance. However, too often this
dialogue is uni-directional. This is the classic
we run it, you fix it syndrome.
Performance of basic maintenance tasks by
operations staff does not mean that
maintenance abrogates responsibility for all
maintenance activities. It does mean operators
are responsible for knowing when they need to
carry out simple preventive tasks, and when
they should rely on maintenance. Operator
involvement is the process that facilitates the
necessary dialogue.
Successful implementation of operator-
performed activities inevitably impacts the
operator involvement dialogue. Thus, by
definition, ODR comes into being. ODR does
not address the whole maintenance / reliability
function in a plant and should not exist in
isolation from TPM / RCM / or some other
combined maintenance philosophy that
properly defines what needs to be done.
Experience shows, however, that ODR is
beneficial in terms of its cost effectiveness and
development of an enlightened and productive
dialogue between maintenance and production
functions. Embracing an ODR approach frees
24

up maintenance time, which allows new
monitoring and diagnostic technologies to be
implemented (when appropriate), without
running the risk of neglecting basic
maintenance tasks.
A closing quote from Heinz P Bloch [14]: Not
long ago a dedicated team of reliability
professionals met to discuss what it takes to
become a best practices or best of class
company. In summary, the team considered
that the top quartile companies pay much
attention to the often overlooked, generally
unglamorous basics. It was agreed that these
high performers emphasize the need to
understand when, where, and how appropriate
work practices and upgrade measures make
economic sense.
There was consensus that the facility gets
more rapid, readily quantified results from the
near term strategy of identifying and picking
the ripe, low hanging fruit - so to speak. They
defer embarking on defining, selecting, and
implementing desirable plant-wide total
productive maintenance (TPM), reliability-
centered maintenance (RCM), or similar
packaged programs.
11 References
[1] McKenna, Ted; Oliverson, Ray. Glossary
of reliability and maintenance terms. Gulf
Publishing Company, Houston, Texas, 1997.
[2] Peters, Ralph W.P. "Maintenance
Management and Control". In: Handbook of
Industrial Engineering - Third Edition.
Salvendy, Gavriel (Eds). John Wiley & Sons,
New York, 2001, pp.1585 - 1623.
[3] Kennedy, Ross (President, The Center
for TPM Australasia). What Really is
Australasian 3rd generation TPM?
http://www.reliabilityweb.com/articles/3rd_ge
neration_TPM.htm
2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved
Operator Driven Reliability
[4] MacLaine, Colin. Joined-up Working,
Works Management, Copyright Findlay
Publications Ltd.
http://www.maintenancetv.com/world/mtv/arti
cles/JoinedUpWorking.htm
[5] Tajiri, Masaji; Gotoh, Fumio. TPM
Implementation - A Japanese Approach.
McGraw-Hill Inc., New York, 1992.
[6] Shirose, Kunio; TPM for Workshop
Leaders copyright Book News, Inc. Portland,
1994
[7] Det Norske Veritas Limited, What is
Reliability Centered maintenance?
http://www.dnv.com/ogpi/pdf/Reliability_cent
red_Maintenance.pdf
[8] Jones, Walter; Kubenka, Joe; Ledet,
Business Driven Reliability at Mobils
Beaumont Refinery, Presented at
Industrial Services International 1999.
http://www.mfg-
game.com/docs/MobileBeaumontISI.doc
[9] James, Ron. "Machine Condition
Monitoring; A Catalyst for Change in
Industrial Equipment Maintenance". P/PM
Technology, 2001, October, pp. 20-40.
[10] Rothschild, Richard S. Using Handheld
Pen-Based Computers For Maintenance,
Maintenance Technology journal, Oct 1998
[11] Burres, Keith. How Reliability Affects
Earnings Per Share, Maintenance
Technology, February 2000.
http://www.mt-online.com/current/02-
00mm.html
[12] Strozniak, Peter. Rising To The
Challenge Industry Week Journal, November
2001
http://www.industryweek.com/CurrentArticles
/Asp/articles.asp?ArticleId=1148
25
 Operator Driven Reliability

[13] Bloch, Heinz P. Consider Machine

Condition Inspection Systems, Hydrocarbon
Processing, Vol. 79(5), 2000

[14] Bloch, Heinz P. Preliminaries to a

Successful Reliability Strategy, Hydrocarbon
Processing, Vol. 79(2), 2000

12 Table of Acronyms
AM - Asset Management

CMMS - Computerized Maintenance

Management System(s)

FMEA - Failure Mode and Effect Analysis

HSE - Health, Safety and Environment

KPI - Key Performance Indicator

MSR - Maintenance Strategy Review

MTBF - Mean Time Between Failure

OBM - Operator Based Maintenance

ODR - Operator Driven Reliability

OEE - Overall Equipment Effectiveness

OEM - Original Equipment Manufacturer

PDA - Personal Digital Assistant

PdM - Predictive Maintenance

PM - Planned Maintenance

RCFA - Root Cause Failure Analysis

RCM - Reliability Centered Maintenance

TPM - Total Productive Maintenance

2004 SKF Reliability Systems All Rights Reserved 26