The CMRT exam is the leading credentialing program by the Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals (SMRP) for the knowledge, skills and abilities of maintenance and reliability technicians.
The CMRT exam tests competency and knowledge of specific tasks within 4 domains: Maintenance Practices, Preventative and Predictive Maintenance, Troubleshooting and Analysis, and Corrective Maintenance.
And that’s all well and good! But, why should you have your technicians certified? What are the benefits of having them pass the CMRT?
Here are 5 reasons why you should have your technicians certified:
- Validates the individual’s knowledge on maintenance and reliability best practices within the 4 domains.
- Confirms your commitment to advancing your team’s professional development.
- A globally recognized certification provides a personal level of satisfaction and pride of accomplishment.
- Encourages people to move beyond the status quo and achieve more for the organization.
- Determines strengths and opportunities by subject area to provide a development plan road-map.
Get certified today! Click here to learn more about the CMRT certification.
Learn about People and Processes’ Maintenance and Reliability Technician Core Concepts Course
by Yolanda Lopez
Guest post by John Lambert at Benchmark PDM
Recently I have been seeing the P to F interval curve popping up a lot on my LinkedIn feed and in articles that I have read. It was a concept that I was first introduced to when I was implementing Reliability Centered Maintenance into the Engineering and Maintenance department at the plant where I worked at the time. It was a great idea, that if done correctly is maintenance benefit. Why, because its cost savings and cost avoidance. Let me explain this.
The P to F curve was used as a learning tool for Condition Based Maintenance. The curve is the life expectancy of a machine, an asset. The P is the point when a change in the condition of the machine is detected. The F is when it reaches functional failure. This means that it is not doing the job it was designed to do. For example, if it were a seal that is designed to keep fluids in and contamination out and is now leaking, its in a state of functional failure. Will this put the machine down? Probably not, but it depends on the importance of the seal and the application. This is an important point because the P (potential failure) is a fixed point when you detect the change in condition but the F (failure) is a moving point. Not all warnings of failure put the machine down very often you have options and time.
Consider this: If I have a bucket that has a hole in it, it is in a functional failure state. But can I still use it to bail out my sinking boat? You bet I can!
Failure comes at us in many ways and obviously we have many ways to combat it. If you detect the potential failure early enough (and it can be months and months before actual failure) it means that you can avoid the breakdown. You can schedule an outage to do a repair. It’s not a breakdown, the machine hasn’t stopped, it’s not downtime. This is cost avoidance and the plant can save on the interrupted loss of production because of downtime costs.
There are a lot of examples of cost avoidance and also of cost savings. For instance, at the plant I worked at we used ultrasound to monitor bearings. We detected a very early warning in the sound level and were able to grease the bearing and the sound level dropped. We saved the bearing of any damage, we saved a potential breakdown so this is cost savings. Even if there is some bearing damage, the fact that we are aware and monitoring the situation lets us avoid any secondary damage.
It’s one price to replace a seal and its more if you have to replace a bearing in a gearbox. However, it can be very expensive to have to replace a shaft because the bearing has sized onto it ruined it. Secondary, ancillary damage can mount up very quickly if you don’t heed the warning you are given with the P of potential failure.
This warning of potential failure gives you time before any breakdown. The earlier the detection, the more time. Time to plan, view your options. And what people tend not to do is failure analysis while the machine is still in service. A failure analysis gives you a great start on seeking out the root cause but start right away, not when the machine is down.
Condition monitoring or as its often called Condition based maintenance (CBM) does work. However, for me there is a down side to this and I will explain why shortly. CBM is based on measurement, which is good because we all know to control a process we must measure.
Consultants (and I’m guilty) like to put labels on things and you may see:
1.Design, Capability, Precision Maintenance.
2.CBM, Predictive Maintenance
4.Run to Failure, Breakdown Maintenance.
For me the P to F interval curve starts when the machine starts. That means Design and Precision Maintenance is not in the curve and this happens before startup. A small point but it takes away from the interval meaning.
We use predictive maintenance technologies in CBM. Vibration, Ultrasonic, Infrared, Oil Analysis, NDT (i.e. pipe wall thickness) and Operational Performance. They are all very good technologies, yet it is a combination of cross-technologies that works best. As an example, vibration may give you the most information yet ultrasound may give you the earliest warning on a high-speed bearing. And then there is oil analysis which may be best for a low-speed gearbox. It all depends on the application you have which dictates what’s best for you. A lot of time and effort was placed on having the best CBM program and to buy the right technology.
This, I believe, lead to the maintenance departments putting the focus on Condition based maintenance!
This I think is wrong because we still have failure. This means that CBM is no better than Predictive Maintenance. This doesn’t mean that I don’t recommend CBM, I do. To me it’s a must have but it does not improve the maintenance process because you still have machine failure.
Machine failures fall into three categories Premature failure, Random failure and Age-related failure.
We want the latter of these. We know from studies that say that 11% of machine assets fail because of age-related issues. They grow old and wear out. This means that 89% fail because of some other fault. This is a good thing because it gives us an opportunity to do something about them.
These numbers come from a very famous study by Nowlan and Heap (Google it!) that was commissioned by the US Defense Department. It doesn’t mean these numbers are an exact refection for every industry but the study but it has stood the test of time and I believe it has lead to the development of Reliability Centered Maintenance. But let’s say its wrong and let us double the amount they say is age related (full machine life expectancy). That would make it 22% and 78% would be the amount of random failures. Even if we quadruple it its only 44% meaning random is at 56% and we are still on the wrong side of the equation. The maintenance goal has to be to get the full life expectancy for all their machine assets.
In order to get the full life expectancy for a machine unit I think you have to be assured of two things. One is the design of the unit which includes all related parts (not just the pump but the piping as well). The other is the installation.
If you’re like me, and you believe that Condition Based Maintenance starts when the machine starts then you understand that there is a section of the machines life that happens before. You could make an argument that it starts when you buy it because, as we all know, how we store it can have an effect. However, what is important at this stage is the design and installation of the machine. In most cases, we do not design the pump, gearbox or compressor but we do size them so that they meet the required output (hopefully). We do quite often design the piping configuration or the bases for example. All of which is very important but the reality is that maintenance departments maintain already-in-place machine assets. So, although a new installation, requiring design work is not often done, installation is.
Remove and Refit is done constantly. And the installation is something that you can control. In fact, it’s the installation that has the largest influence on the machines life. The goal is to create a stress-free environment for the machine to run in. No pipe strain, no distorted bases, no thermal expansion, no misalignment, etc.
Precision Maintenance was a term I first heard thirty years ago. Its part of our M.A.A.D. training program (Measure, Analyse, Action and Documentation). It’s simple, it means working to a standard. Maintenance departments can set their own standards. However, all must agree on it and adhere to it. This is the only way to control the installation process. This is the way to stop random failure and get the full life expectancy for your machine assets. The issue is that we do not have a general machinery installation standard to work to. Yes, we can and use information from other specific industry sources such as the American Petroleum Institute (API) or the information from the OEM (both of these are guidelines) however nothing for the general industry as a whole. Well this is about to change. The American National Standard Institute (ANSI) has just approved a new standard which is about to be published. I know this because I worked on it and will be writing about it shortly.
If you look at the life cycle of a machine, we need to know and manage the failure as best we can. If we only focus or mainly focus on the failure, we will not improve the reliability of the machine. We cannot control the failure. What we can control is the installation and done correctly this will improve the process giving the optimum life for the machine.
I sell laser alignment systems as well a vibration instruments. If a customer were to buy a vibration monitoring tool before they bought a laser system. I would think their focus is on the effect of the issue not the cause. What do you think?
by Ana Maria Delgado, CRL
The Potential to Failure Curve (or P-F Curve) gives the user information on how an asset behaves before a failure occurs. This example is focused on failure due to misalignment. The goal of a reliability focused plant is to be as far to the left on the curve as possible. While some companies are doing predictive maintenance work in an effort to reach the left side, many companies today are on the right domain of the curve, doing reactive work. Being in the reactive domain—putting out fires as they say— increases maintenance costs. This forces a company to perform unplanned work, causes unscheduled downtime, and higher costs to expedite parts. Using technologies like ultrasound, thermography, and vibration analysis will catch an asset in a pre-failing state. This allows time to plan and schedule the repair to take place. However, with the right processes in place, the technician should recognize the misalignment of the machine before it causes components to fail. The ultimate goal is to be so far left on the curve, that it is off the chart, at the point where all the efforts (flat and rigid bases, accounting for thermal growth, eliminating soft foot, precision alignment, etc) are made so that the machine never runs misaligned.
by Adam Stredel CRL
Guest post by Shon Isenhour, CMRP, CAMA, CCMP, Founding Partner at Eruditio LLC
So if you could sum up the common areas of focus during reliability improvement efforts what would they be?
The thought behind this blog post was if someone ask us what we are doing or what all is involved in a reliability improvement effort, how can we give them the scope in a concise, and memorable way. This could be used early on in the discovery or kick off phase to outline without overwhelming.
I have listed nine things that I would focus on and they all start with P for ease of remembering.
Using technology to understand equipment condition in a noninvasive way before the functional failure occurs
Example: Vibration, Ultrasonic, Infrared
Traditional and more invasive time based inspections which should be failure mode based
Example: Visual Inspection of gears in a gear box
Doing the maintenance craft to the best in class standards to prevent infant mortality
Example: Alignment, Balancing, Bolt Torquing
Clear series of steps to identify, prioritize, plan, schedule, execute, and capture history with who is responsible for each
Example: Work Identification Process, Root Cause Process. Work Completion Process
The process for understanding the real causes of problems and using business case thinking to select solutions that reduce or eliminate the chance of recurrence
Example: Root Cause Analysis, Fault Tree, Sequence of Events
Prioritizing of Work
The process of determining sequences of work as well as level of effort using tools like equipment criticality and work order type
Example: RIME index
These are the processes required to have the right part at the right time in the right condition at the right place for the right cost
Example: Cycle counting process, proper storage procedures, kitting process
This piece is about taking the identified work and building the work instructions, work package and collecting the required parts and then scheduling the execution.
Example: Job Packages, Schedules, Gantt Charts
This is where we deal with the change management and leadership portion which is required in order to truly make a change to the organization
Example: Situational Leadership, Communication Planning, Risk Identification, Training
So here are my nine “Ps” that you can share as early communication to get your organization on board with your reliability efforts and develop the Profit we all want.
What would you add?
by Yolanda Lopez
Certain technologies have been used for a very long time to identify corrective actions required to keep equipment operational and reliable. Vibration Analysis, Ultrasonic Monitoring, infrared thermography, motor condition evaluation and lubrication analysis are examples of these technologies. Many terms have been used to describe their usage within a facility. One term often used is “Predictive Maintenance”. Unfortunately, this term can be used in the literal sense with dire consequences.
Many facilities mix all of the required ingredients together to create a successful maintenance and reliability program. Regrettably, many others fail in their efforts. Two of the primary elements for success are predictive maintenance and work execution. The predictive maintenance effort may be quite effective at identifying conditional changes in equipment that should be addressed before functional failures occur. Those efforts will not be fruitful if the results are not executed. The predictive maintenance team has to generate work that is planned, scheduled and executed. If the results of their efforts are not executed, then the facility will plainly predict costly failures that will be experienced by the facility. Basically, the effort will shift from “Predictive Maintenance” to “Predictive Failures”.
Make sure your facility is not predicting failures. Make certain the results of the predictive maintenance technologies are executed before conditional changes result in equipment failures.
by Trent Phillips CRL CMRP - Novelis
Why does so much ‘stuff’ fall between the cracks that exist between data and information. So often we see a highly trained analyst with a tremendous amount of data working with a manager who takes very little information from the data. There is obviously a communication breakdown but who is to blame. Is it the analyst for not clearly interpreting what the data –the squiggly lines– are telling us. Or is it the manager’s fault for not understanding what he’s seeing. The reality is that the fault lies with both of them.
I know of some analysts who believe that their role is to take readings and supply them – with a little interpretation- to the maintenance manager. I also know some maintenance managers who when faced with this situation merely file away the reports. Obviously neither is right but neither has bothered to take the time to make sure that they clearly understand what the purpose of the whole exercise is.
As a plant maintenance manager I didn’t know the intricacies and nuances of spectrum analysis or waterfalls or acceleration enveloping – I didn’t need to! That’s what the analyst was there for, but what I did need to do was communicate clearly to the analyst what it was that I wanted from the exercise. For me it was fairly simple – I needed to have enough information to make a more informed decision. That is really the purpose of any measures that we make so I always made a point of clearly explaining this to the analyst. I needed to know if there were any imminent failures or if there were dramatic changes in the trends, what the implications of the changes were and how fast the deterioration was taking place (even though we call it predictive maintenance, exact predictions are very difficult).
The analysts I liked working with were the insistent persistent ones – the ones who would not leave until they were sure I got the message. Many people would have considered them a pain – but they were the ones I wanted on my team as they felt the same sort of ownership that I did. I guess that’s the key to it all – ownership – as along with the ownership, there is the pride and success that you share with every good call with every failure mitigated. But this only happens when there is clear communication of the purpose, goals and expectations. So don’t forget – Communicate, Communicate, Communicate
Thanks to Cliff Williams, Author of People – A Reliability Success Story, for sharing his expertise with us.
by Ana Maria Delgado, CRL
It is All About the Cost!
We have all been there — It is about time to leave for the weekend on a late Friday afternoon, most of your maintenance staff has already left for the weekend, as you are getting ready to head out, all of the sudden someone runs up to you and says, “We have a problem, one of our assets just failed”. As you hurry off to assess the situation and mentally start thinking of who you can get in touch with to help rectify the situation, you cannot help but wonder to yourself, could this failure have been prevented?
Many people who are involved with maintenance and operations of critical machine parts know of the benefits of a routine Predictive Maintenance Program, and have often attempted to establish a Predictive Maintenance Program (PdM) within their facilities. The problem is, very rarely do the people who know the value of a PdM program have the ability to allocate the required budget to implement a PdM program, and without hard numbers, budgeting for a PdM program can be a hard sell. Here are some ways that one can use to help justify a PdM Program within your facility.
When businesses look at where to allocate their money, they do so with the hope of investing into things that will have the greatest return on investment (ROI). This is understandable because businesses are in business to turn a profit. Often times, others outside of maintenance and operations do not understand the return they will see through a PdM program being implemented. However, with a well-established PdM program, companies can generally see their ROI in less than one year! And, in actuality, the ROI happens more typically within about 6 months time. That means, the money that it costs to start a program is typically saved by the company within 6 months time from implementation.
All plants will have a random failure, but a well run PdM program will help detect and mitigate many of the potential problems and prevent many unplanned outages on critical assets. Unscheduled downtime is expensive and can result in safety or environmental incidents. Hidden costs from failures can include premium pay, premium cost for non-stocked spares, and additional regulatory reporting.
Potential savings from a well run PdM program also include reduced maintenance costs because intervals for periodic preventative maintenance shutdowns can be extended because you know the condition of the machine, and can decide that a PM is not required at the current interval. Also, since machine condition is better known, parts inventories can be reduced and the parts can be sitting on the vendor’s shelf instead of yours.
Put simply, if it costs $1 Million a week to run your plan, a breakdown that results in a plant outage can cost $6000 per hour in downtime plus the cost of repair, overtime, premium costs of parts not in stock, environmental clean-up, etc. This does not include potential profit from lost sales.
Predictive Maintenance Programs offer the lowest cost with the highest savings for most plants and facilities. With a PdM program established maintenance will be able to detect when an asset is deteriorating ensuring that a spare is ordered and on hand. In addition, the repair can be scheduled during a scheduled downtime, so there is no loss in production. In addition, if the company contracts out the PdM program, often times your company can avoid the initial start-up costs associated with starting up a PdM program.
Thanks to our training partners Pioneer Engineering for allowing us to share this article with you.
by Ana Maria Delgado, CRL
PUMPS & SYSTEMS • May 2012
“If you can find a path with no obstacles, it probably doesn’t lead anywhere.” ?— Frank A. Clark
“So easy that even a caveman can do it, ” as stated in a popular TV commercial, could easily be used to describe today’s predictive maintenance tools because they work so well. However, to be truly competitive, a company’s goals should go further than being satisfied with marginal improvements in machine reliability.
Achieving equipment reliability that is required for maximum profits is both realistic and obtainable for any company. Proper use of predictive maintenance (PdM) tools is a key factor in realizing such goals. This article provides solutions to overcoming obstacles and issues associated with monitoring machinery and using predictive maintenance tools—such as precision shaft alignment and vibration instruments.
Read my entire article Overcome the Obstacles to Successful Predictive Maintenance
by Bill Hillman CMRP
iPURCHASE, A supplement from IMPO MAGAZINE • March 2012
Companies are attempting to operate leaner and more efficiently every day, with predictive maintenance still serving as a driving force. With a variety of tools on the market, there is something for every operation, large or small.
There is so much technology available to manufacturers and distributors, it’s hard to know where to start looking, especially when it comes to industrial maintenance equipment.
If you’ve thought about starting up a predictive maintenance program in the past, but have shied away because of the details involved, or if you currently have a program in place and just aren’t seeing the results that you would like to see, you are not alone – this is a complex topic with constantly evolving technological solutions. And from a distributor standpoint, possessing a purchasing and sales team that truly understands the functionality and value these tools can bring to the customer is a great way to stand out from the pack. Two individuals in the predictive maintenance industry who deal specifically with vibration analysis were willing to share their scoop on the issues that they found most critical to understanding the significance of this technology.
“Predictive maintenance technologies can be applied to almost any equipment or system that has rotating, electrical or lubricated components,” notes Trent Phillips, the Condition Monitoring Manager for Florida-based LUDECA, Inc. “This includes motors, pumps, fans, gearboxes, turbines, generators, compressors, milling machines and many more. Some of the common equipment faults detected with vibration analysis are bearing defects, lubrication issues, misalignment, unbalance, gear defects, electrical problems, belt issues, resonance, looseness, foundation problems, and many more.” It looks like everybody needs predictive maintenance equipment.
Read entire article Predictive Maintenance Technologies
by Ana Maria Delgado, CRL
Back in July 2011, ArcelorMittal Point Lisas, Trinidad awarded TOSL’s Predictive Maintenance (PdM) Department with a one year contract for Reliability and Condition Based Monitoring. It was the first time a process like that would be implemented at ArcelorMittal. The contract is being executed by our Senior PdM technician, Mark Dwarika, and PdM technicians, Samir Khan and Ramon Rabathaly.
TOSL’s PdM Department is currently facilitating ArcelorMittal with Reliability and Condition Monitoring Services, inclusive of vibration data collection and analysis, lube-oil sampling and analysis, as well as infrared thermographic inspection of the DR1, DR2 and DR3 plants. Over the short period since the commencement of the contract the reliability of the facility has improved by approximately 8% —surpassing expectations.
Karth Arthur, Assistant Engineering Manager at ArcelorMittal quoted that: “It gives me great pleasure to recommend TOSL Engineering Ltd to any firm. I have worked with TOSL from March, 2010 to present. During this time they have provided condition monitoring services to our five plants. These include Vibration Analysis, Thermographic Analysis, Electrical Signature Analysis (ESA) and Oil Analysis. The quality of work has been of the highest standard and their reports have been clear and concise. With these services we have increased our availability by 15% and reliability by 8%. I recommend them with enthusiasm, and we will continue to utilize the services of TOSL Engineering Ltd”.
Early fault detection of rotating and static equipment components is a key factor to improving the mean time between failures (MTBF). The PdM technicians are now based at the ArcelorMittal as a fully incorporated faction of the facility. The interaction between the facility management, engineers and TOSL personnel have improved the plants reliability to where failure of components monitored and corrections made based on recommendations and consultation have decreased drastically. Monthly PowerPoint Presentations, departmental meetings, as well as equipment condition assessment reports, updating and emergency action plans on critical equipment are also a major role that the technicians are either responsible for or play a role in.
Repairs on equipment are facilitated by ArcelorMittal’s respective maintenance departments, but it is also the PdM technicians’ responsibility to oversee and, if necessary, recommend changes to procedures in place. Overall the actions and recommendations collectively outline the basis of a functional Reliability and Condition Monitoring Program with improvements noted.
Congratulations to ArcelorMittal and TOSL Engineering Ltd., LUDECA‘s representative in Trinidad & Tobago, for their Reliability Achievements.
by Ana Maria Delgado, CRL
March 2011 • IMPO MAGAZINE, iPurchase Supplement
As the American economy recovers, how aware, or active, are manufacturers concerning predictive maintenance?
Most manufacturers never lost the desire to increase their overall reliability and predictive maintenance efforts during the recent economic slowdown. Some companies did postpone purchases of predictive maintenance related products. However, a lot of companies realize that an investment in predictive maintenance technologies is a viable means to decrease overall maintenance expenses, so they do it the right way. A lot of manufacturers, as a result of this understanding, continued to invest into predictive maintenance related technologies during the recent economic slowdown. This allowed them to reduce overall maintenance costs and place their company in a more competitive position once the economy recovers. Interest in these products is higher this year as companies continue to invest in vibration- and alignment-related products to reduce their costs. increase competitive advantages, and manufacture equipment reliability.
Read entire interview Q&A Roundtable from iPurchase, a supplement from IMPO Magazine including:
Are there any interesting trends occurring in the maintenance market?
Why do you think laser alignment is important to a manufacturer’s maintenance strategy?
How would you recommend a manufacturer approach the creation of a more robust maintenance plan?
by Trent Phillips
- Functionality: Do the Predictive Maintenance (PdM) tools you are considering have the ability to make all the measurements required by your physical asset management strategy? Are displays easy-to-see and interpret? Are the tools easy-to-learn and easy-to-use? Learn about our PdM tools.For Software, can it interface with your CMMS system? Can you import data from other systems such as oil data? Learn about our OMNITREND software.
- Durability: Will the tools hold up to your plant’s environment? Are they rugged enough for multiple users? IP ratings such as water–, dust– and shockproof are very important when dealing with industrial tools.
- Service: Will your vendor be available to answer questions or address problems should they arise? What is the vendor’s reputation for customer service? If you have a problem with a tool how soon can you expect a “loaner” until yours is repaired? Are the tools repaired and/or calibrated locally? Learn about LUDECA Repair and Calibration.
- Training: What are the training costs associated with learning how to use the tools? Is training included with the purchase? What training resources are available? Learn about LUDECA Training.
- Support: What level of support do you need? Does the vendor have a call-in tech support center, is it free or paid? Will the yearly costs of maintenance agreements make the tools considerably more expensive than competitor’s tools having similar capabilities? Do they offer free updates? Learn about LUDECA Technical Support.
by Bill Hillman CMRP
Successfully persuading your management team about the importance of predictive maintenance requires a certain mind-set, one that embraces the ideology that any failure in selling predictive maintenance lies within your selling techniques and not the management team. Success will simply depend on developing the proper selling methods. You are more likely to have success if you show management why they, not you, need predictive maintenance in the company. We have always heard that managers speak the language of dollars. This is true. Attempt to avoid all technical reasons for justifying PDM and make good arguments based on savings and profitability. Reduced energy consumption, increased uptime, longer machine life, increased machine reliability, and improved products are just a few in a long list of items that will result from good PDM. However, just stating these items will not be very persuasive in your selling attempts. You must show how these benefits relate specifically to applications in your company and present dollar figures calculating the value added by implementation of PDM technologies. Any data included with the dollar figures should be simple and easy to understand for a non-technical person. Trend plots, bar graphs, or pie charts are effective visual displays of such information. Your report should be concise but lengthy enough to convey relevant information. Brevity usually works best.If you don’t succeed on the first try, be persistent and improve you selling techniques. Remember, the fault lies in your methods and not with the management team. Luck is not a requirement for success. Only the proper arguments are required. Once the correct selling strategy is found, success is sure to follow.
by Bill Hillman CMRP
April 2010 · Reliable Plant Magazine
It is common knowledge that technologies such as vibration analysis, shaft alignment, oil analysis, thermal imaging, motor circuit testing and several other technologies are excellent tools to help achieve these results. These technologies can be used for the identification and elimination of machinery defects on a daily basis.Many facilities are content with the knowledge that machinery defects (bearing defects, gearbox defects, etc.) have been identified, scheduled for maintenance and ultimately repaired utilizing these technologies. An optimized reliability program will constantly seek the root causes that create the machinery defects, thereby avoiding many chronic and recurring problems. Most facilities believe that finding the root cause of equipment defects can be difficult. This may be true in some cases, but it is not always the reality. In fact, many of the actual root causes of equipment defects can be easily identified. The elimination of these root causes will reduce the amount of equipment defects that must be repaired over time, help you achieve the goal of reduced maintenance cost and increase profits at your company.
Read entire article Do you want to increase profits and reduce maintenance costs for your facility?
by Trent Phillips
We would like to extend a special thanks to those who attended the Facilities Tour in our Doral Training Center on Tuesday. The event started with an overview of our company by Frank Seidenthal followed by a keynote presentation “Getting Maximum Value from a PDM Process” by Bill Hillman.Reliability 2.0 attendees were given a tour of our facility including our NUPIC approved calibration laboratory and they also had the opportunity to interact with the measurement instruments at our various maintenance technology stations featuring dedicated equipment for machinery alignment, vibration analysis, balancing, bearing heating as well as specialized systems and simulators for more demanding measurement applications such as bore and turbine alignment, flatness, straightness and leveling.All stations were equipped with dedicated systems for hands-on experience with the benefit of guidance and assistance from our attending application engineers.We look forward to our next event and to serving your alignment and condition monitoring needs.We leave you all with Bill’s closing statement:
The Key to Success We can train. We can change the way we talk. We can change the way we think. BUT! UNLESS WE CHANGE WHAT WE DO, ALL THE REST IS ONLY BACKGROUND NOISE.
by Ana Maria Delgado, CRL