From the very start, the implementation of a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) is a long and arduous process. One of the largest concerns is how to effectively get the correct data into the system in the first place, and then, how to get useful information out. The better and more consistently recording of repair activities is done, the greater potential for yielding greater and more specific information about an operation.

Scheduled shutdowns, however, can provide unique opportunities to a maintenance department not normally available during standard operation or even during short shutdown periods. Lost capacity can be restored to an overtaxed facility during an extended shutdown. Major equipment overhauls can be performed to help prevent future unscheduled shutdowns. Government mandated inspections and repairs can be accomplished during a shutdown, bringing a plant into better compliance.

Digital measurement technology certainly has taken the test industry forward, mostly with giant strides. The exact opposite may be true, however, when it is applied to testing for aging-related failure modes such as intermittency or no fault found (NFF). Digital abstraction devices, perfect for parametric testing, rarely synchronize to real-time, randomly occurring, anomalous, or intermittent age-related failure events. This shortcoming is especially acute when large numbers of circuit nodes require testing.

Much has been written in the past about the implementation of maintenance software (CMMS systems). This article takes a slightly different approach in that it attempts to explain some of the pitfalls associated with first time implementation in SME’s. It suggests a “try before you buy” approach, which stages the maintenance software implementation to reduce both risk and cost. Tales of failed implementations abound and failure rates of 40% to 80% are commonly quoted. Real statistics are hard to come by but the following data is both relevant and current.

For most companies, gone are the days when users were forced to conform to a rigid framework dictated by the CMMS vendor and strictly controlled by the Information Systems department. Users today enjoy freedom to customise the content, look and feel of their CMMS environment on a variety of devices, from handhelds to desktops. With modern computers and software, users are overwhelmed with choices.

CMMS systems, as we have come to know them, come basically from two distinct families. These are ERP systems such as SAP, JDE and the PRONTO system and EAM systems such as Epac, MIMS and a plethora of other systems. When most maintenance practitioners refer to CMMS systems they are in reality talking about EAM systems.

Industry pacesetters use real-time equipment data to prioritize and optimize their maintenance resources. The process is straightforward in concept: use real-time data to determine the equipment health, but only inform the Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) when maintenance is actually necessary. From there, the CMMS automatically produces the work order and uses the workflow that is already familiar to all maintenance personnel.