Advertisement

A framework for improvement of production plant performance using production assurance programs

  • Javad Barabady
  • Tore Markeset
  • Uday Kumar
Original Article

Abstract

The main objective of a production assurance program (PAP) for a production plant is to ensure that the planned production capacity is achieved. The assurance programs describe the activities necessary to fulfil the objectives, how they will be carried out, by whom, and when. These activities also provide input to decisions-making regarding design, manufacturing, construction, installation, operation, and maintenance of plants. It is a challenge to manage and improve production assurance. The aim of this paper is to present and discuss a methodology for improvement of production assurance performance through PAP, organized into four steps, namely data collection and information management, modeling and data analysis, generation of improvement alternatives and evaluation and decision-making.

Keywords

Production assurance programmes Reliability Maintainability Production performance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aven T (1986) On the computation of certain measures of importance of system components. Microelectron Reliab 26:279–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aven T, Vinnem JE, Rød W (2006) On the use of goals, quantitative criteria and requirements in safety management. Risk Manage 8:118–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barabady J, Terje A (2007) Implementation of production availability programmes in engineering projects, Proceedings, European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL), Stavanger, Norway, pp 487–494Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barabady J, Kumar U (2007) Availability allocation through importance measures. Int J Qual Reliab Manage 24(6): 643–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barabady J, Kumar U (2007) Reliability characteristics based maintenance scheduling: A case study of a crushing plant. Int J Performab Eng 3(3):319–328Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blanchard BS, Verma D, Peterson EL (1995) Maintainability: a key to effective serviceability and maintenance management, New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gao X, Markeset T (2007) A review of Production Assurance in the Norwegian Petroleum Industry. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Reliability, Maintainability and Safety, 20–26th August, Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghodrati B, Kumar U (2005) Operating environment based spare parts forecasting and logistics: a case study. Int J Logistics: Res Appl 8:95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hjorteland A, Aven T (2003) Reliability analysis and observables. Proceedings of the 14th European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2003) Vol. 1, ISBN 90 5809 551 7, MaastrichtGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    IEC 60300-3-10 (2001) International Standard IEC 60300-3-10: Dependability management — Part 3–10: Application guide — Maintainability, IEC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    IEC 60706-3 (2006) International Standard IEC 60706-3: Maintainability of equipment — Part 3: Verification and collection, analysis and presentation of data, 2nd edn., IEC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    IEV 191 (2007) International Electrotechnical Vocabulary (IEV) Online, Chapter 191: Dependability and quality of service. http://std.iec.ch/iec60050 (accessed April 2007)
  13. 13.
    International Atomic Energy Agency (2001) Reliability Assurance Programme Guidebook for Advanced Light Water Reactors, Vienna: IAEAGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    ISO 20815 (2008) Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries — Production assurance and reliability management http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=39744, accessed August 14th, 2008
  15. 15.
    ISO/DIS 14224 (2004) Petroleum, petrochemical, and natural gas industries—Collection and exchange of reliability and maintenance data for equipmentGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kawauchi Y, Rausand M (2002) A new approach to production regularity/availability assessment in the oil and chemical industries. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 75:379–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kumar U, Barabady J (2007) Production assurance performance concept, Swedish Production Symposium, Gothenburg, 28–30 August, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Markeset T (2003) Dimensioning of Product Support: Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities, Doctoral Thesis No. 6, University of Stavanger, ISBN 82-7644-197-1, ISSN 1502-3877Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Markeset T, Kumar U (2003) Design and development of product support & maintenance concepts for industrial systems. J Qual Mainten Eng 9(4)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nakajima S (1998) Introduction to TPM: Total Productive Maintenance, Productivity Press CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    NORSOK Z-016, (Norwegian Technology Standard Institution) (2003) Regularity Management and Reliability TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tsai YT, Wang KS, Teng HY (2001) Optimizing preventive maintenance for mechanical components using genetic algorithms. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 74:89–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Reliability Engineering, Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM), India and The Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TromsøTromsøNorway
  2. 2.University of StavangerStavangerNorway
  3. 3.Luleå University of TechnologyLuleåSweden

Personalised recommendations