Sei sulla pagina 1di 36

The magazine by practitioners for practitioners.

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3 www.smrp.org

Meeting Customer Needs


Through Equipment Reliability

How Plant Reliability Affects a Lean Implementation

Risk and Reliability of Transformers

The $25 Billion Profit Pot

14

1-800-849-2041 041

For on-site training pleas call ing please

Training
Reliability and maintenance training for the manufacturing and process industry.
We dont sell engineering services, parts, tools,

equipment or software...our independence translates into objective and credible advice and training.
IDCONs Best Practice Open Seminar Schedule for 2012
Course Maintenance Planning and Scheduling / Reliability Based Spare Parts and Materials Management Preventive Maintenance / Essential Care and Condition Monitoring Root Cause Problem Elimination Training Dates/Raleigh, NC May 9-11, 2012
and

November 12-14, 2012 September 10-11, 2012 September 12-13, 2012

May 7-8, 2012


and

and

November 15-16, 2012

w w w. i d c o n . c o m

1-800-849-2041

June 2012 Volume 7, Issue 3

Features

4 8 14

How Plant Reliability Affects a Lean Implementation


Discover the outcome of Lean implementation through a plant managers perspective at two different manufacturing plants. Owned by the same Fortune 500 corporation, the two facilities have surprising results.
PAUL BORDERS, CMRP

Risk and Reliability of Transformers


Learn how Alan Ross gains a unique perspective on transformer risk and reliability by joining a transformer maintenance company that has evolved its practices over a 45-year period. Explore the four categories of risk in this feature. ALAN ROSS

The $25 Billion Profit Pot


Rod Ellsworth, vice president for global asset sustainability at Infor, looks at some of the biggest culprits of energy waste in manufacturing plants, and highlights the colossal opportunity to turn waste into profit. Energy is the single largest operating and maintenance expense, forming 60% of a typical manufacturers O&M budget. Research shows that up to 80% of this energy is wasted. This article will delve into the biggest culprits of energy.
ROD ELLSWORTH

Departments
2 2 19 20 21 22 24 26 30 32 32 OffIceRs And dIRecTORs fROm THe cHAIR Did You Know? STAN MOORE, CMRP BOK cORneR Adding Value to Membership through SMRPs Library of
Knowlege.
BRUCE HAWKINS, BEST PRACTICES COMMITTEE CHAIR

memBeR sPOTLIgHT Meet Steve Carter, CMRP fROm THe eXAm TeAm Improve Your Personal OEE. memBeR cORneR new! cHAPTeR ROund-uP weLcOme new memBeRs SMRP welcomes new executive and individual members. new cmRPs SMRPCO welcomes new certificants. ceRTIfIcATIOn uPdATe CMRP & CMRT Paper Exams: Turnaround Time from SMRP smRPcO susTAInIng sPOnsORs
TERRy HARRIS, CMRP

14

SMRP Solutions (ISN#1552-5082) is published bi-monthly by the Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals, exclusively for SMRP members. The annual subscription rate is $15 for members, which is included in dues. The Society was incorporated as an Illinois not-for profit corporation in 1992 for those in the maintenance profession to share practitioner experiences and network. The Society is dedicated to excellence in maintenance and reliability in all types of manufacturing and services organizations, and promotes maintenance excellence worldwide. SMRPs Mission is to develop and promote leaders in Reliability and Physical Asset Management. The products featured in SMRP Solutions are not endorsed by SMRP, and SMRP assumes no responsibility in connection with the purchase or use of such products. The opinions expressed in the articles contained in SMRP Solutions are not necessarily those of the editor or SMRP. Back Issues: The current issue and back issues of SMRP Solutions can be downloaded from the library area of the SMRP Web site. Original versions of the current issue and some back issues of Solutions are available by contacting SMRP Headquarters ($5 per copy for members, $10 per copy for non-members). SEND ADDRESS CHANGES AND INQUIRIES TO: SMRP Headquarters, 1100 Johnson Ferry Road, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30342, 800-950-7354, Fax: 404-252-0774 E-mail: info@smrp.org.

2012 SMRP officers & Directors


Chair
Stan Moore, CMRP Ascend Materials stanmoore@ascendmaterials.com 256-552-2173

FRoM the ChaiR

Did You Know?


By stan moore, CmrP ChaIr of smrP 2011-2012 I thought it would be good to take this opportunity to update you on some of the inner workings of SMRP. A primer of sorts, in a Q&A format. I trust that you, as a member, will find this beneficial.

immediate Past Chair, advisory Committee


Rick Baldridge, CMRP Cargill, Inc. rick_baldridge@cargill.com 952-984-6356

Vice Chair
Shon Isenhour, CMRP GP Allied, Inc. sisenhour@gpallied.com 843-810-4446

id you know that you can make tax deductible contributions to the SMRP

Foundation? It is a great way to support our Foundation as we strive to drive education

in the reliability and maintenance profession. The SMRP consists of both a 501(c)

treasurer
Nick Roberts, CMRP DuPont nick.l.roberts@usa.dupont.com 251-753-2922

(3) Foundation and a 501(c)(6) Society. These are IRS designations pertaining to organizations. In general terms, donations to a 501(c)(3) organization such as the SMRP Foundation can be considered tax deductible. 501(c)(3) organizations can be characterized as charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. Specific to our Foundation, the focus and emphasis is on education in the reliability and maintenance profession. Our Body of Knowledge is organized under the Foundation. Additionally, our scholarship program is funded and supported by the Foundation. Our other major focus areas, including the annual conference, certifications, and membership are organized under the Society. Did you know that we award scholarships each year? In an effort to encourage academic institutions and their students to consider careers in maintenance and reliability, and to further encourage professionalism in the field, the SMRP will annually award various scholarship monies to selected individuals who have applied for such funds and for which the SMRP Board of Directors acting through the Academic Liaison Committee have deemed deserving. In addition to these awards, the SMRP also offers another scholarship that will be granted to an individual student, enrolled in an accredited college or university, regardless of his/her concentration. Historically, applications for our scholarships have been relatively low, so I encourage you to visit the SMRP Web site for additional information. The deadline for applicants is August 15, 2012. You can also find this information under the Education link on www.smrp.org. Did you know that we are a volunteer organization? Our officers, directorates and committee members are all volunteers with a passion to advance the reliability and maintenance profession. We all have full-time jobs and employers that graciously allow us to support SMRP and the advancement of our profession. It is rewarding to see that many companies continue to see the benefits of the SMRP and the return on investment. We are also supported by a great team from Kellen, our management company, and Howe & Hutton, our legal counsel. Our Board is comprised of a balanced mix of both service providers and end-users, all with their CMRP. Want to get involved? Get plugged into a committee or volunteer to work as a track leader at our annual conference. It is professionally and personally rewarding and I encourage you to get involved. Did you know that our fiscal year is July to June? Three years ago when we reorganized into the Foundation and Society, we moved our fiscal year to start in July rather than in January. We chose to do this to better balance our revenue and expenses within the fiscal year.

Secretary
Craig Seibold, CMRP Johns Manville seiboldc@jm.com 303-978-2641

Certification & Standards Director


Greg Yeager, CMRP Cargill, Inc. greg_yeager@cargill.com 952-984-2850

Body of Knowledge Director


Ron Leonard, CMRP, PE Life Cycle Engineering, Inc. rleonard@lce.com 843-744-7110

education Director
Butch DiMezzo, CMRP Management Resources Group, Inc. dimezzob@mrgsolutions.com 704-995-2262

Member Services Director


Edward Foster, CMRP The Mundy Companies edfoster@mundycos.com 281-530-8711

outreach Director
Howard Penrose, CMRP Dreisilker Electrical Motors hpenrose@dreisilker.com 630-469-7510

SMRP SolutionS

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

Did you know that this is our 20th anniversary? SMRP had its start in 1992 as a group of industry professionals looking for a way to advance the reliability and maintenance profession across corporate boundaries for the benefit of all. The Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals (SMRP) came to be as a result of discussions between senior officers of HSB Reliability Technologies and Applied Technology Publications, the publisher of MAINTENANCE TECHNOLOGY, which took place near the end of 1991 and into early 1992. The two founding companies invited a number of their clients and associates to attend a meeting at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Chicago to discuss the need for an association that would be directed to maintenance and reliability personnel. We are looking forward to our annual conference this year, celebrating 20 years of professional growth and development in the maintenance and reliability profession. Did you know that we are seeing renewed interest in our Special Interest Groups or SIGs? SIGs are groups with a very defined focus of interest. Where a Chapter will have members from many industry sectors and interests, a SIG is more narrowly focused within an industry sector or interest. Our first SIG, Petrochemicals, Oil and Gas, is seeing renewed interest. We recently launched the Pharma and Biotech SIG and, even more recently, the Reliability Analytics of SIG. These are just a few of

the ways that SMRP is working with membership to bring value and a forum for information exchange. Final thoughts and considerations. The Board is wrapping up the budgeting process for the 2013 fiscal year. This is always an exciting time as we look to the future and how we can grow the organization. Nick Roberts, our treasurer, has done a great job this year pulling together an aggressive budget. Ed Foster, our member services director, has been a great addition to your Board and is working on several fronts to improve member value. Howard Penrose, our outreach director, is working with Kellen to improve our marketing strategy, including our Web presence. Craig Seibold, our secretary, has been leading a review of our policies and bylaws, ensuring they are current and germane. We recently participated in the USA Science and Engineering Festival held in April in Washington D.C. (See Member Corner, SMRP Booth Educates Children, page 22.) Shon Isenhour, our vice chair, recognized the need for SMRP to have a presence at this event. Our annual conference, under the leadership of Butch DiMezzo, continues to grow and is shaping up to be our best conference yet. All of these efforts require dedication and focus from our volunteers. I am proud to serve and represent such a team.

Oil Sight Glasses Solve Oil Inspection and Contamination Problems!


Escos Oil Sight Glasses will prolong the life of your equipment. Installs to drain port in minutes No maintenance Constant visual monitoring of oil Easy discharge of accumulated water Use on pumps, gear boxes or any fluid lubricated machinery
Scan for more information.

Esco Products, Inc. | 800.966.5514 | www.oilsightglass.com


June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3 SMRP SolutionS

SMRP SolutionS

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

How Plant Reliability Affects a Lean Implementation


By: Paul Borders, CmrP

his article examines the experience of a plant manager who had the opportunity to lead two different manufacturing plants. The plants were similar in numerous ways. They were both build-

ing products manufacturing facilities, both were continuous processes, both had roughly 300 hourly workers, and they were both owned by the same Fortune 500 corporation. The important difference between the two facilities was that one plant had a relatively mature manufacturing reliability program in place prior to the Lean implementation and the second plant was a typical North American plant that was highly reactive in its maintenance processes. The outcome of the Lean implementation at the two locations could not have been more dramatically different. The Lean implementation at the reliable plant was powerful and transforming, while the Lean implementation at the non-reliable plant did not deliver long-term results. This article describes the plant managers experience in leading two separate plants and why he reached the conclusion that its critical to have a reliable facility for a successful Lean manufacturing implementation. Blitz events were conducted very similarly in the two plants. Whether they were 5S events or Kaizen events focusing on a process or problem area, they were typically three to five days in length, facilitated by either a consultant or a corporate continuous improvement leader, and had roughly eight to 16 hourly employees engaged in the event.

Blitz Events in a Non-Reliable Plant


The blitz events in the non-reliable plant were tougher to pull together. The first real challenge was getting participants to take part in the event. Because the work days were tough and challenging in the reactive environment, most employees were reluctant to come in and work days in excess of what they were scheduled. Managers and supervisors sponsoring the event would often have to assign employees to work on the blitz event instead of having them volunteer for the project.

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

SMRP SolutionS

how Plant reliability af fects a lean Implementation

An additional problem with blitz events in the non-reliable plant was establishing a baseline of performance for processes. The leadership team wanted to measure the improvements made over the course of the event, but there were many times this was not possible because of equipment downtime or process upset occurring in either the baseline measurement or during the measurement of the after improvements section. This always resulted in deflation for the participants of the event because the equipment messed up. A particularly aggravating problem that occurred in blitz events in the non-

participate in future events because they felt their efforts were in vain. The management teams credibility suffered as well.

willingness to participate and actually lead events increased because they saw the positive changes that were implemented and they saw the results being sustained.

Blitz Events in a Reliable Plant


Blitz events in the reliable plant were dramatically different. The leadership team enjoyed much more management credibility with hourly employees. This was largely because of the progress that had been made in the prior two years with implementing reliability. Hourly employees daily work lives had been deeply impacted by the improvements in

Kanban
The opportunity to create a Kanban system in finished goods existed in both plants. Both had fairly typical inventory strategies. The sites produced inventory to match a sales forecast or to react to working capital directives. There was a dramatic difference, however, in the ability of the plants to capitalize on the opportunity to utilize Kanban for producing to actual customer demand.

Hourly employees daily work lives had been deeply impacted by the improvements in machine condition and the operational stability that resulted.
reliable plant was participants getting pulled from the event because of equipment problems. Electricians, mechanical craftsmen, and area supervisors were especially hard hit with this phenomenon because their skills were either needed to get the equipment back up or their expertise was required to juggle the production schedule or shipping schedule to react to the downtime. Needless to say, it was disappointing to the team when someone who had been in on all the discussions during the event would get yanked out of the event to go take care of the days problems. Probably the most insidious and damaging aspect of blitz events performed in the non-reliable plant was difficulty in sustaining the gains made during the event. Because the workplace was so often either reacting to, or recovering from, a significant equipment problem, managers and supervisors struggled with executing the critical leadership behaviors that were necessary to sustain the gains that were made in blitz events. The eventual deterioration of the area or process that had improved was visible to both hourly employees and the managers. This would, in turn, reinforce the reluctance for employees to
6 SMRP SolutionS

Kanban in a Non-Reliable Plant


As previously discussed, machine conditions in the non-reliable plant were unstable and the resulting downtime made frequent schedule changes necessary. Often a machine breakdown would limit the plants ability to produce some products. As a result, the plant would sometimes run products that were not needed for orders simply because it needed to produce products to hit gross production targets stated in pounds. There was no way the plant could have implemented a Kanban system to produce to the Kanban signal. While the plant still provided excellent customer service as measured by order fill rates and shipping dates, this was largely made possible by having very large inventories that served as buffers to absorb the impact of a chaotic production schedule.

machine condition and the operational stability that resulted. They were very happy with results of implementing the principles of reliability, even after the first year. This credibility resulted in hourly employees who were much more eager to participate in blitz events. People were excited about the opportunity to impact their work lives in a positive way. The scheduling challenges of backfilling participants normal jobs persisted in some cases but there were many participants whose jobs were not backfilled for the event because the stability of the plant did not require them to be on their jobs all the time. It made an enormous difference to have all the participants remain in the event for the entire duration. The team dynamics were much more positive; it was rare for someone to have to leave the event to take care of problems. This allowed all the participants to own the results, and more importantly, own the changes made in the event so they could maintain the improvements and provide insight to other employees about changes that were made and why they took that direction. As the facility performed more and more successful blitz events, employees

Kanban in a Reliable Plant


After three years of persevering in the implementation of its reliability program, the ability to produce the production schedule grew very strong. At the encouragement of the sites Continuous Improvement Leader, the plant implemented a Kanban system for one of its very popular product lines. There were certainly some formidable mental challenges that needed to be overcome. Warehouse personnel and scheduling personnel had grown accustomed to a cushion in inventory, and the very thought of taking inventory levels down produced much fear that needed to be managed.
June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

how Plant reliability af fects a lean Implementation

Once the team was engaged and trained in the Kanban concept and the workings of the signal for inventory replenishment were created, they simply started running the system. While there were a few tweaks of the system over the first few months, the facility quickly gained confidence in its ability to produce and work with the much lower resulting inventory levels. On the front end of implementing the Kanban system, leadership felt that improved financials were going to be the primary benefit because of the reduction in working capital. In reality, while leadership quickly realized the financial impact, the improvement in working conditions for plant warehouse staff became the big win. With much lower inventory, unanticipated benefits included: Wider aisles for the forklift drivers to maneuver forklifts; less stress for the forklift drivers due to more room to work;

less finished product damage; less property damage because of better visibility; and less investment in finished product storage costs. Even with much lower inventory levels,

equipment maintenance work planned, scheduled, completed, and closed out, becomes a cornerstone of organizational discipline that is fundamental when the elements of Lean manufacturing are utilized.

the plant continued to provide high levels of customer service. The absolute key to this process was the ability to produce the right products for customers at the right time. With reliable production machinery, this plant was able to produce what the schedule called for.

Paul Borders is principle consultant for life Cycle engineering. Paul helps companies sustain performance improvements by driving culture change to ensure new systems become a fundamental way of life. Certified by Prosci as a Change management leader, Paul is also a facilitator with the life Cycle Institute, where he uses high impact learning techniques to teach courses including reliability excellence for managers (rxm).

Conclusion
The experience of leading these two similar, but very different facilities really underscored the importance of having a plant be reliable before implementing Lean manufacturing. The cadence of execution that is learned by the organization through having

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

SMRP SolutionS

TRANSFO
Risk and Reliability of
By: alan ross

SMRP SolutionS

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

ORMERS
the author refleCts on how he gaIned a unIque PersPeCtIVe on transformer rIsk and relIaBIlIty By JoInIng a transformer maIntenanCe ComPany that has eVolVed Its PraCtICes oVer a 45-year PerIod Beyond strICtly ChemICal oIl testIng to a multI-faCeted aPProaCh InCorPoratIng eleCtrICal and meChanICal faCtors.

eliability engineers and maintenance professionals have developed unique solutions for most of their productive assets.

Whether mining, refining, metals processing, chemical processing or simply manufacturing assembly, the time and attention paid to critical productive assets has been rewarded with less unplanned downtime and better asset planning. An asset group that was missed in the best of these maintenance and reliability systems plans is transformersthe heart of the electrical system. Transformers were overlooked primarily because of their long-lasting durability and effectiveness. For utilities, they are a critical component of the product they make and distribute. For industry, they are considered important assets, but until lately, have also been one of the most taken-for-granted in the production cycle. Today, it is precisely because of the historical reliability of transformers that the risks are greater than anticipated and significantly more important to manage.

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

SMRP SolutionS

risk and reliability of transformers

Recently, I participated in three day-long seminars: Transformer Risks and Reliability, conducted by Munich Re. Why would one of the largest, if not THE largest, insurer and reinsurer of transformers conduct these seminars in New York, San Francisco, and Houston? Quite simply, they have seen the future, and if recent trends are any indication, the future looks risky. The Risk Factors Chart presents four categories of risk. If we can determine the biggest risks, develop standardized testing and preventive maintenance plans, we can reduce risk, or at a minimum, better prepare for the eventual failure of a transformer. We will address both transformer life extension and end of life reaction planning later. For now, lets consider the four categories of risk:

found the greatest application risk came from a smaller specialized unit powering one of its furnaces that is subject to some of the harshest operating cycles from peak demand requirements. A relatively new transformer in good condition ran the line for the furnace. If it ever went down, millions of dollars to rework the furnace and its line would have to be spent.

Risk # 2: Failure
When transformers fail with increased frequency, the law of unintended consequences is often in play. Fire damage, safety, and environmental issues can lead to losses and downtime much greater than just the impact of the transformer failure itself. Even without an explosion failure, a transformer leaking oil outside a dammed area would likely be considered a hazardous waste violation. Now you must deal with penalties enacted by local, state, and even federal environmental agencies. It is virtually impossible to monetize the cost of a transformer failure because so much depends on the type of failure. Examples include an automatic shut-down with transformer housing intact, oil leakage from a bushing, or a catastrophic explosion. Certain transformers, due to their size, location, load, and condition, have a greater failure risk than others. For these types of transformers, we should create a higher degree of monitoring and testing to prevent a catastrophic failure. There are enough proven methods for reaction planning to get the maximum life of that unit

Risk #1: Application


Application Risk stems from the impact on the business if a specific transformer fails. It can be calculated and predicted and should also identify which transformers in your fleet would cost the most in unplanned down-time if failed. Application risk is the cost of failure to your production. Amazingly, it is not uncommon for smaller transformers operating key lines or production processes to have a much higher application risk than most would believe. Ask the question: If this transformer would fail, what would be the impact on productive output? Recently, we reviewed a customers transformer risk factor. We

Condition-Based
The cost of assessing the current condition to avoid failure

Application
The cost or impact to production

End-of-Life
The cost to getting back up and running

Failure
Both direct and indirect

Risk Factors
The The four risk factors when analyzed together can give four risk factorswhen analyzed togethercan Risk Managers a better picture in viewing the overall risk risk managers a better picture in viewing the overall risk of transformer and electrical failure and how best to minimize it. transformer and electrical failure, and how best to minimize it.
10 SMRP SolutionS June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

while implementing the end of life plan for that specific unit. Recently, a company experienced the failure of one of its single transformer units caused by a fire. This led to the complete destruction of its entire line of transformers. The overall cost exceeded $19 million, which was well beyond the replacement cost of the single transformer alone. With several insurance carriers involved, and the complexities of determining fault, it took two years of litigation to determine liability. The legal costs to protect the companys best interest also became an added cost of the failure. One of the most often overlooked failure risks is the safety of personnelboth company employees and contractors. Recently in Florida, a Load Tap Changer failure caused the death of one employee and one contractor. We also asked one of the largest transformer rewind and repair companies in the world whether or not it had ever rebuilt and rewound a transformer that had not failed. The answer was an emphatic No! Then we asked: What would the potential cost savings be should an at-risk large distribution transformer unit be taken out of service prior to failure? The answer was that the cost savings would run into hundreds of thousands of dollars. This clearly demonstrates that much of the severity from failure risks can and should be prevented.

Risk #3: End-of-Life


Transformer manufacturing and installation peaked in America in the 1960s and 1970s with the rapid expansion of industry. Many of these units are no longer in production, have very tight physical footprints due to the building of productive infrastructure around them, and may not even be able to travel the current roads and rails necessary. Given the recently revised weight limits on bridges, the elimination of thousands of miles of rail spurs and load limits on overweight and oversized trucks, the transportation rules that applied when the transformers were installed in the 1960s and 1970s are much different today. When we evaluated the end-of-life risks for transformers at a metal processing facility, the transformers with the high application risk were not the one with the highest end-of-life risk. They were several rectifier transformers built in the 1990s considered specialty transformers with unique design characteristics that were no longer standard line transformers from manufacturers. If they failed, it would take 26 weeks of production time to replace them; therefore, the end-of-life risk for these units was tremendously high. One important consideration was transportation costs. The old rail spur ended seven miles from the plant, so moving the unit out and back via rail completely was not an option. Transport via specialty truck requiring extensive specialty permits would prove more costly than the entire re-production itself. When the end-of-life risk and application risk were combined, we monetized the cost of developing the reaction plan with the department head. We expect that cost decision to be made at a much higher level since capital budgets with major operational costs typically get approved within the annual planning process and not departmentally.
June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

is it better to plan ahead by developing a reaction plan consisting of budgetary costs for unit rebuild or replacement and understanding and budget for transportation and contractor access? or, is it better to wait until something happens?
SMRP SolutionS

11

risk and reliability of transformers

Is it better to plan ahead by developing a reaction plan consisting of budgetary costs for unit rebuild or replacement and understanding and budget for transportation and contractor access? Or, is it better to wait until something happens? Obviously, in this instance, a good reaction plan would save tremendous amounts of time and money while allowing corporate management to develop capital budget plans over years rather than within days of a failure.

disintegrated approach to transformer maintenance is one of the most significant changes we are bringing to reliability and systems management.

Can You Achieve Risk Equilibrium?


In the Risk Factors Chart (p. 10), it appears that all risks are equal, which is seldom or hardly ever the case. Some risks are projections of the future and others are based on assessment of the past. When you combine a higher condition-based risk with any of the other risks, you create a multiplier effect. But starting out with condition-based risks for all units may be time and cost prohibitive. Which transformers are at greatest application risk? What will the impact be on production if that unit goes down? This requires an impact assessment to determine the specific impact on the business that the most critical units support. Certainly, a catastrophic loss to a unit is not desirable. But, losing a smaller padmount unit that supports a back parking lot is not as critical to the business as losing a unit powering the main production line. An impact assessment must go even deeper into the risk by looking at potential transportation, availability of spares or repair facilities, and myriad of other issues arising if this critical unit were to fail. Thus, determining criticality must be one of the first steps in the assessment process. In reality, there is no such thing as risk equilibrium. There is only risk balancing or mitigation.

Risk #4: Condition-Based


Can transformer failures be avoided? Can life extension mitigate this risk? Since joining SD Myers, I am tremendously biased when it comes to maximizing the life of a transformer. I have seen firsthand how effective it is to develop standards, rigorously test and track the condition of the fleet of transformers, and maintain that fleet to those standards. Quite simply, the easiest risk to mitigate is the condition-based risk. At SD Myers, we maintain our productive assets with increasing rigor, yet too often even our best customers confuse chemical or electrical testing of a transformer with its maintenance. There is so much more to a complete condition assessment than trended oil tests. While that is a great and important first step, the next steps are as equally critical. Is recommended maintenance on oil processing standard throughout the company, or is it left up to each individual responsible for maintaining one plant? Not all oil processing is alike. While some contractors clean the oil, others may process on the unit until they address issues in the paper and the oil. Since the life of the transformer is dependent on the life of the paper, processing on oil alone is often a false sense of security. Acids, gases, and moisture leach back into the oil from the paper, thus even routine oil processing maintenance is highly dependent on a rigorous set of processing standards that should be based on your standard test results. What criteria should be used for electrical testing to create a best practices testing and maintenance protocol? What data is available from the manufacturer at assembly and installation to determine changes over time? A simple Sweep Frequency Response Analysis (SFRA) test can serve as the baseline for future condition assessment, yet too often we do not have that data. It is a matter of developing a reliable system that can address the condition of the unit without a lot of added costs or down-time during the life of that unit: Not at the end of life. It is all about assessment, planning, and systems. For one of our customers who operated multiple transformers at multiple sites, we were asked to develop a standard of testing and maintenance for their units that had a great deal of commonality. For more than seven years, we had performed chemical testing on the units to track their condition. When we began to address the complete condition of each unit, we asked for their electrical test data. The customer told us they had never conducted electrical tests. While oil testing could be considered critical with 75% of the data required to make good maintenance and planning decisions, electrical testing provides another important 25%. This
12 SMRP SolutionS SMRP SolutionS

Life Extension: A Universal Concern


Obviously, the first and most important take-away from transformer risk analysis is that you are doing everything possible and economically-feasible to extend the life of these critical assets. Even a company with one unit is at risk if it happens to run its data center off of it. How long can most of us go if our data and/or Emergency Response Plan (ERP) systems shut down for a couple of weeks? Consider the call from the CEO on that one. Earlier, the term life extension was mentioned. The subject of transformer maintenance and life extension has been a term defined in many different ways in many different markets. Today, the perspective on transformer maintenance and life extension is becoming a universal concern. The motivating factors behind the unification of strategy on transformer maintenance and life extension has been driven by some common factors including the aging population of transformers and a higher-than-expected failure rate from newer replacement units. The general aging inventory of electrical power equipment, given that the infrastructure building peaked more than 40 years ago as pointed out earlier, means a great potential for failure over the next decade. Prior to developing impact assessments, condition assessments, and reaction plans, we should first consider a life extension system to develop and maintain the necessary testing and preventive maintenance practices as a priority.
June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 33 June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue

risk and reliability of transformers

Older units need this system since the tighter parameters and design criteria on newer transformers include closer tolerances, a reduction in case sizes and internal clearances, and newer units requiring an even more robust system.

Developing A Reliable System


So where does that leave us? What should a company dependent upon the safe, reliable, and uninterrupted use of electrical power do? Four Suggestions:

alan ross is the vice president of sd myers, Inc. responsible for developing and executing long-term strategies, alan progresses next generation leadership for all operating units, domestically and internationally for sd myers, Inc. alan is an executive member of smrP with a mechanical engineering (me) degree from georgia Institute of technology (ga tech) and an mBa in international business and marketing from georgia state university.

1.

Understand the short- and long-term, direct and indirect impact and costs associated with unplanned power outages from the loss of a transformer.

2. Develop and implement a set of standards for determining the operating condition of transformer(s) through the use of intrusive and non-intrusive testing. 3. Develop a preventative maintenance plan. 4. Implement the plan company-wide, giving reliability professionals the tools they need to monitor and maintain this critical and often overlooked asset class. 5. Develop a reaction plan for every critical transformer in your area of responsibility and control.

Noria Training Calendar


For the most up-to-date Training Schedule, visit noria.com or call 800-597-5460 Fundamentals of Machinery Lubrication June 12-14, 2012 Orlando, FL July 10-12, 2012 Milwaukee, WI July 24-26, 2012 Toronto, ON Canada August 7-9, 2012 Nashville, TN Sept. 18-20, 2012 Myrtle Beach, SC October 23-25, 2012 Las Vegas, NV Advanced Machinery Lubrication August 7-9, 2012 Nashville, TN

International Council for Machinery Lubrication


ICML certification testing is available after most of the courses listed. Please visit www.lubecouncil.org for more information on certification and test dates.

Practical Oil Analysis July 10-12, 2012 Milwaukee, WI October 23-25, 2012 Las Vegas, NV

This training is an extremely important part of any reliability lubrication program. The course was full of valuable information while the instructor was very friendly and took the time to answer all the questions at every level of expertise. -- Jimmy Coltrain, Reliability Coordinator, Weyerhaeuser

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue7, Issue 3 June 2012 | Volume 3

SMRP SolutionS

13

The

$25 Billion Profit Pot


Cut to the Bone

riven by economic pressures that preceded and continued throughout the

recession, there is a view the manufacturing industry has cut costs back to the bone, a fact which has been partly responsible for its recovery. But while it might appear that the sector has exhausted all avenues of inefficiencies, this perception is only valid in the context of the parameters through which productivity is traditionally measured. In fact, evidence suggests the majority are incurring excessive, unnecessary costs to the tune of a staggering $25 billion. As economic conditions seem set to remain tough for some time yet, manufacturers cannot afford to ignore the possibility of untapped profit if they are to maintain a competitive edge and avoid stalling the sectors recovery.

By: rod ellsworth

New Opportunities
The reason this untapped pool of savings exists is because traditional metrics look primarily at productivity as the key variable in driving operational costs down, but typically do not include energy usage. Energy is seen as a fixed cost that sits outside of operational overheads, rather than a potential area for inefficiencies to be stripped.
14 SMRP SolutionS June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

By broadening the parameters within which manufacturers look for savings, research highlights plenty of potential to cut waste. Energy is the single largest operating and maintenance expense, forming 60% of a typical manufacturers O&M budget. Research shows that up to 80% of this energy is wasted. To put that into solid figures, for the worst performing manufacturers, of every $100 in the O&M budget, $48 is spent on wasted energy. With electricity prices up 30% since 2003, failure to address energy waste means that its relative cost to the business will only increase.

energy. A simple comparison of the total annual utility costs might identify these, but would not answer the question why? This is important because the facilities or operations that spend the most on energy may not be the right ones to focus resources on. They may spend the most on energy for a number of reasons. For example, they may be the largest facility, they may have a specific use, or they may be subject to different operating constraints. It would be much wiser to identify those facilities that spend the most per square foot per year, or the most per product produceda calculation known as energy intensity. The process of comparing energy intensity across an enterprise or with external operations is referred to as benchmarking, which identifies the facilities or operations that are the most inefficient across an operation, enabling resources to be focused on the areas that will deliver the highest return. This is where the inefficiencies of three-phase would be highlighted, if monitored. This sounds relatively straightforward in theory but the practice can be a different matter. The granularity demanded by such an approach is impossible to translate into meaningful information through using traditional tools. The level of data necessary requires sophisticated collation and analysis, which is only available through the latest breed of enterprise asset management and asset sustainability software. Fed by sensors that can measure anything from electricity to steam, these applications quickly benchmark assets and entire facilities. The business can then remove or change inefficient processes, parts, and machines that are disproportionately energy hungry. This also extends the lifecycle of assets through an evaluation of running costs against efficiency levels.

The Usual Suspects? Singling Out the Culprits


While energy wastage occurs universally, there are a few notable areas that can claim responsibility for a large proportion. Energyhungry three-phase motors that are used in equipment, ranging from industrial fans, blowers, and pumps, account for a hefty 60% of electricity consumption in the world.1 Manufacturers typically use thousands of these of motors in their plant equipment, and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) estimates they lose over 12% of their energy due to phase imbalance caused by loose connections. Overall, this equates to $25 billion worth of wasted energy each year a huge potential savings. So bear in mind this is just one, albeit a major source of waste, and the potential gains start to come into sharp focus. But the real culprit lays in how energy use is measured. Energy reduction strategies are often comprised of a utility bill-led approach, which while valid, is limited in what it can actually tell you about where inefficiencies and wastage are occurring. This energy bill down approach does not include the detailed energy consumption patterns of individual plant assets that can identify when and where most wastage occurs. Without this detail, there is no way of knowing how much of the energy consumed is being wasted, and therefore what can be eliminated without impacting the running of day-to-day operations.

Winding Up
The number of new legal and regulatory targets and standards pertaining to energy usage means that failure to address energy conservation isnt really an option. For example ISO 50001 now establishes a framework for industrial plants, commercial facilities, or entire organizations to manage energy. It is estimated that the new standard could influence up to 60% of the worlds energy use. But rather than viewing compliance with these initiatives as a cost or additional pressure, smart manufacturers will exploit the opportunity to stem wasted energy from their equipment and in doing so, take a portion of the $25 billion profit pot that is there for the taking.

Unlocking the Savings


Because most manufacturers dont track energy consumption at the asset level, let alone what proportion of that energy is wasted, many find themselves in virgin territory when tasked with exploiting this opportunity. To realize the full extent of energy waste, it is important to fully understand the problem, identify which assets require attention and remain alert to the need to fix. For example, an operations manager in charge of a large portfolio of facilities across multiple manufacturing operations would inevitably find it impossible to devote attention to all the facilities or operations at the same time. Time and resources must be focused on those that warrant the most attention, or those that appear to be using most energy. To identify those facilities or operations most in need of attention, one of the first things to ascertain is which facilities or operations are using excessive
1. Department of Energy June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

rod ellsworth is Vice President of global asset sustainability at Infor, the third largest provider of business software and services. he brings over 30 years of related energy and enterprise asset management experience and spearheaded the development and application of Infors global asset sustainability solution, Infor eam enterprise sustainability (www. infor.com).
SMRP SolutionS

15

16

SMRP SolutionS June 2012 | Volume 7, Registration will be open in June 2012. Save the Date and Plan To Join Issue 3 Us!

2012 SMRP SPonSoRShiP FoRM


With more than 1,000 decision makers in the maintenance and reliability industry attending SMRPs 20th Annual Conference, your company will not want to miss out on amazing sponsorship opportunities. Ensure maximum exposure for your company through high visibility sponsorship opportunities with your target audience! Through these partnerships, SMRP is able to develop strong workshops and advocate M&R initiatives to benefit the community as a whole.

i. 2012 SPonSoRShiP oPPoRtunitieS


Instructions: Please check the sponsorship(s) you are interested in and list the value ($) at the end: Each sponsor will receive: recognition on the sponsorship page of the SMRP conference Web site (www.smrp.org) recognition from the podium at the General & Closing Session signage with your company logo at sponsored event(s) opportunity to display product literature on an exclusive sponsor display board sponsor ribbons for company representatives

PLATINUM SPONSORSHIP PACKAGES: q $15,000 The Most Maintained Sponsorship .............................................................................. $ ________
Includes overall conference sponsorship signage, logo/hyperlink on conference Web site, logo in onsite brochure, 10x20 exhibit booth, (4) complimentary conference registrations, overall golf sponsorship, (2) golf hole sponsorships, (1) Silver Sponsorship

q $10,000 The Most Reliable Sponsorship .................................................................................. $ ________


Includes overall conference sponsorship signage, logo/hyperlink on conference Web site, logo in onsite brochure, 10X10 exhibit booth, (2) complimentary conference registrations, (1) Silver Sponsorship, (1) golf hole sponsorship

q $5,000 The Most Professional Sponsorship .............................................................................. $ ________

Includes overall conference sponsor signage, logo/hyperlink on conference Web site, sponsorship mention & logo on event marketing materials, (2) complimentary conference registrations (1) Silver Sponsorship, (1) golf hole sponsorship

GOLD SPONSORSHIPS:
q Memory Stick (electronic proceedings) $9,000 ............................................................................................................... $________ q Hotel Keycard (room key w/company logo/graphic) $8,000 ............................................................................................ $________ q Opening Keynote $5,000 ............................................................................................................................................... $________ q Padfolio (with company logo) $3,000 (2 available) .......................................................................................................... $________ q Hotel Door Hangers (with company logo and text) $3,000 ............................................................................................... $________

SILVER SPONSORSHIPS:
q q q q q q q q Signage (company logo on all conference signage) $2,500 ................................................................................................................. $________ Monday Welcome Reception $2,500 (2 available) ............................................................................................................................... $________ 20th Anniversary Toast at the closing session $2,500 (2 available) ...................................................................................................... $________ Floor Decals 5 2x3 floor decals in conference area $2,500 (4 avail.) ............................................................................................... $________ Wall Clings 5 2x3 wall decals in conference area $2,500 (4 avail.) .................................................................................................. $________ Pen for Padfolio with company logo $2,000 ......................................................................................................................................... $________ Tuesday Reception $2,000 (2 available) .............................................................................................................................................. $________ Conference Lanyards w/company logo $2,000 .................................................................................................................................... $________

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals

SMRP SolutionS

17

Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals


BRONZE SPONSORSHIPS:
q q q q q q q q q q Exhibitor Lounge $1,500 ..................................................................................................................................................... $________ Track Sponsorships $1,500 (6 available, 1 per track) ........................................................................................................................... $________ Workshop Sponsorships $1,500 (19 available, 1 per workshop) .......................................................................................................... $________ Closing Session/Raffle $1,000 (3 available) ......................................................................................................................................... $________ Job Fair $1,000 (2 available) ............................................................................................................................................................... $________ Lunch: Tues_____ Wed_____ $1,000 (1 avail. each day) ............................................................................................................ $________ Breakfast: Tues____ Wed____ Thurs____ $750 (1 avail. each day) ................................................................................................. $________ Breaks: Tues AM____ Tues PM____ $500 (1 avail. per break) ...................................................................................................... $________ Breaks: Wed AM____ Wed PM____ $500 (1 avail. per break) ...................................................................................................... $________ Padfolio insert $250 (10 available) ..................................................................................................................................................... $________

GOLF SPONSORSHIPS:
q q q q q q $2,500 Overall Golf Event Sponsorship ............................................................................................................................................... $________ $2,000 Golf Cart Sponsorship ............................................................................................................................................................ $________ $350 Closest to the Hole Sponsorship ................................................................................................................................................ $________ $350 Longest Drive Contest ............................................................................................................................................................... $________ $350 Beverage Cart Sponsorship ....................................................................................................................................................... $________ $150 Hole Sponsorship (18 available) ................................................................................................................................................ $________

TOTAL SPONSORSHIPS ............................................................................................. $________


Dont see a sponsorship opportunity that fits your needs? Well be happy to customize one for you! Please contact Sandy Stevens: sstevens@kellencompany.com 678-303-3039

ii. ContaCt inFoRMation


Name: ______________________________________________________ Company:_____________________________________ Title: _______________________________________________________ E-mail: _______________________________________ Address ____________________________________________________ State: __________ Zip Code: _____________________ Phone: __________________________ Fax:_______________________ Web site: _____________________________________

iii. PayMent inFoRMation


Payment. Sponsorships are to be paid in full before we can confirm your sponsorship. Payment may be made via credit card or check. Please make checks payable to SMRP and mail with completed application to: SMRP Attn: Sandy Stevens 1100 Johnson Ferry Road, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30342 Payment by credit card: q American Express q Visa q MasterCard q Discover TOTAL SPONSORSHIPS: $ _______________

Card Number: ________________________________________________ Exp. Date: _____________________________________ Name as it appears on card: _____________________________________ Authorization Signature: __________________________
Credit card payments may be called in to 678-303-3039 or faxed to 404-252-0774. SMRP will send written confirmation of your sponsorship once payment has been processed.

iV. how to Send the FoRM:


Mail:
Attn: Sandy Stevens 1100 Johnson Ferry Road Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30342
18 SMRP SolutionS

Fax:

404-252-0774

email:
sstevens@kellencompany.com
June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

BoDY oF KnowleDge (BoK) CoRneR

adding Value to Membership through SMRPs library of Knowledge


By: laura keane, ProduCt & BusIness deVeloPment manager, smrP that work concurrently to help develop knowledge-based products that add value to members and the overall maintenance and reliability community. Members can easily access these products through the Knowledge Based Library on SMRPs Web site at http://library.smrp.org. SMRPs vision is for the Library to become the ultimate resource for the M&R community. If you have an M&R issue, you can visit the library and find real time, up-todate answers at your fingertips. If your plant is just starting the reliability journey, you can search for metrics you need to put in place, said Ron Leonard, chair of the SMRP Body of Knowledge Directorate. If you have been working on a reliability program and need to know how youre doing, you can click over to benchmarking and participate in the Benchmarking Study. If you come up against a problem that youve never encountered before, you can search various publications for answers.

MRPs Body of Knowledge Directorate oversees three active committees

world-class technology through partnership with eNetrix, a division of Gallup; intuitive online data entry interface; dynamic customized reporting for onthe-fly ad-hoc reporting; subscription-based access to data, allows for unlimited reports and data searches; save entry that allows data entry in multiple sessions if necessary; and non-participants can subscribe to the database. To facilitate data entry and ease the

download capabilities for one year. This new option allows subscribers immediate access to the latest, most updated version of all metrics 365 days a year. Access a single metric or a collection of metrics at http://library.smrp.org. Published compilations of SMRP Metrics are still available under the Publications tab in the Library. However, unlike the online version, these documents will only be updated annually. For direct access to the PDF, go to http://library. smrp.org/publications. Corporate access to metrics is also available. For more information contact info@smrp.org. Guide to the Maintenance & Reliability Body of Knowledge (BoK) Developed by the Maintenance & Reliability Knowledge (M&RK) Committee and based on the five pillars of knowledge, this Guide outlines levels 1 and 2 of the BoK. It also outlines the subject areas to be mastered by a Certified Maintenance and Reliability Professional (CMRP). Currently the committee is working on level 3 of the BoK. Once complete, the entire BoK will be the definitive source for information for maintenance and reliability professionals. Access to the Guide is under the Publications tab in the Library or go directly to http:// library.smrp.org/publications. As a member of SMRP, you have the unique opportunity to participate in the committees that develop these products. Benefits to Committee Participation include the opportunity to: Expand M&R knowledge base; network with some of the most respected reliability professionals in the world; network with peers in other industries; and network with other individuals committed to continuous learning and improvement. If you are interested in participating on a Body of Knowledge Committee, contact info@smrp.org.
SMRP SolutionS

data collection process, a PDF of the assessment tool is available to participants before participating. This facilitates the gathering data prior to entry. The ability to enter data in multiple sessions gives the participant the opportunity to delegate responsibilities for data collection and entry if desired. Once enough data has been gathered, dynamic reports can be accessed throughout the year. The end user can generate customized reports by simply clicking the desired criteria. Results can be seen and downloaded immediately. The Benchmarking Study can be accessed in the Library under the Benchmarking Tab or at https://smrpbenchmarking.enetrix.com. SMRP Consensus-Based Metrics The SMRP Best Practices Committee recently finished the initial publication of 67 consensus Best Practices, 29 of which were harmonized with European Federation of National Maintenance Societies (EFNMS). These standardized metrics/KPIs lay the foundation for meaningful comparisons between organizations. The committee is currently working on world-class target values for the metrics/ KPIs that lend themselves to such. Once completed, the existing metrics will be updated to include these target values. SMRP Metrics (including Harmonized Metrics) are available via subscription, which includes online access and

Available Now in the Library


The Benchmarking Study for Maintenance & Reliability The new online evergreen format for SMRPs M&R Study opens new opportunities for both the practitioner and consultant. From an individual small plant operation to multinational corporations, or from individual consultant to large consulting firm, the new Benchmarking Study provides value to all. Participation in the Benchmarking Study is free and includes 300 data elements and 54 maintenance & reliability questions. Key features of the study include: Separate surveys for maintenance of production equipment and maintenance of facilities; ability to track single owner-multiple sites; standardized definitions to ensure valid comparisons;
June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

19

MeMBeR SPotlight

Meet Steve Carter, CMRP

SMRPs new Chapter Relations Chair Plant Maintenance Manager for Showa Denko Carbon, Inc. and Chair of Carolinas Chapter

something back to the profession by seeking opportunities to share what I have learned with SMRP and other maintenance professionals, said Steve Carter, a member of SMRP since 1996. Steve recognizes the next generation needs to be afforded the same level of training and challenging work experiences in order to maintain our position as a world leader in manufacturing. After 21 years of operating and maintaining U.S. Navy nuclear submarines, Steve decided to join the civilian industry working as a plant maintenance manager for Showa Denko Carbon. He is responsible for overseeing all aspects of maintaining an 80-acre heavy industrial facility, which produces 45,000 metric tons of finished electrodes per year. His particular interests lie in root cause analysis, manufacturing reliability improvement, and change management processes.

have reached a point in my career where I think it is important to give

smrP is a great vehicle for networking with individuals who share my interest in continuous improvement and elevating the status of the profession.
20 SMRP SolutionS

As the Carolinas Chapter Chair and recently elected Chapter Relations Chair, Steve eagerly seeks opportunities to share his experience with other SMRP maintenance professionals. SMRP is a great vehicle for networking with individuals who share my interest in continuous improvement and elevating the status of the profession, Steve noted. He is hooked on the value of being involved with SMRP and enjoys volunteering his time to help fulfill the organizations goals. Becoming a Certified Maintenance & Reliability Professional incurs an obligation to continue your education and to maintain it, Steve said about the CMRP designation. He actively encourages others to pursue the CMRP designation, and

believes M&R professionals gain respect among those who are familiar with the certification process. Steve said, If you dont pass on the first try, at least you will gain some insight on where to focus your efforts to become more knowledgeable about the maintenance business. He said that having the CMRP designation may be the deciding factor between you and another job candidate. Steve is married with two grown daughters and lives in Goose Creek, S.C. Steve enjoys restoring antique motorcycles in his spare time. He recently completed the restoration of a 1957 Ariel Square Four, and is currently looking for his next project. He also enjoys helping his wife with her landscaping projects.

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

FRoM the exaM teaM

improve your Personal oee


By terry harrIs, CmrP exam dIreCtor, smrPCo

recently proctored a CMRT exam venue for a pharmaceutical company. The

to add to the CMRT exam. If you have skills you think are important for the person doing these skills at your facility please send them to me. As I do training with maintenance personnel, I realize the tasks they perform is what keeps our plants operating. But the skill level and knowledge of these people also determine how efficient and

effective our plants operate. I recently was called back to a plant I performed a three-day reliability training course over four years ago. When I arrived at the plant, I listened to their success stories and the way they have gone from 73% OEE to 89% OEE. A great success story! But what did they want to do now? The question is what can we do to get better? What are the next steps and how can we get to 93% OEE? They were at the point where we need to move to the next level of training and processes. They now must again access skill levels and develop new training programs to bring them to these higher levels. There are other process areas to improve, but the people part is key in getting to these higher levels. Many companies use the CMRP exam in the same way. Both these certifications are excellent assessment tools for any plant. We as CMRPs should have looked at our results even if we passed the exam and improved our areas of weakness. Just like the plant that improved its OEE, we should all be improving our OEE to help our companies and our own personal goals.

main reason for giving the exams was to measure the knowledge levels in the different areas of the CMRT Body of Knowledge. The exams were given to find out what areas and skills the maintenance team may be strong or weak. With the information obtained from the exams, training programs can be developed to improve specific skill areas. In the case of pass or fail on the exam, it will make no difference in the training plan. Even if the exam is passed and the certification is obtained, there will still be weak areas that need to be developed. The CMRT exam has Body of Knowledge areas in the following topics: Maintenance Practices; Preventive and Predictive Maintenance; Troubleshooting and Analysis; and Corrective Maintenance. Each of these BOK areas are broken down into sub areas in which questions are developed and tested for use on the exam. Through the guidance of the CMRT Exam Team, the questions have been reviewed and determined that they are good questions that fit all manufacturing business maintenance personnel.

the exam team is always looking for good questions to add to the Cmrt exam.

The Exam Team is always looking for good questions

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

SMRP SolutionS

21

MeMBeR CoRneR

SMRP Booth educates Children about engineering & Manufacturing

he USA Science & Engineering Festival, the nations largest celebration of science and engineering, was hosted at the Walter

a maintenance and reliability perspective. Attendees stood in front of cutting-edge technology to explore heat transmission through various objects, while others listened to high frequency sound waves captured by the ultrasonic gun that humans typically cannot hear. When this opportunity presented itself, SMRP wanted to take advantage of educating students about the maintenance and reliability engineering world and informing these potential future leaders about the abundance of career opportunities available in manufacturing. said Shon Isenhour, CMRP, vice chair of SMRP and director of education for GPAllied, Inc. We were able to share with the students and their parents what SMRP does for industry, as well as how we can help them with scholarships and education opportunities, Over the three-day festival, more than 700 paper airplanes were built and discussion between M&R professionals with 150,000 plus festival goers revolved around SMRP career & scholarship opportunities, the importance of SMRP in the community, and the art behind the technology used in the M&R field.

E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C., April 27-29, 2012 with SMRP represented. A Platinum Sponsor, Society of Maintenance and Reliability Professionals (SMRP) presented Are You Hot or Are You Cool? to showcase infrared camera technology and ultrasonic detection technology. Another interactive activity built into the booth was an airplane-making workshop demonstrating the manufacturing process and how engineers can improve processes over time. The exhibit attracted the attention of thousands of festival attendees of all ages. In the exhibit booth, SMRP maintenance and reliability professionals engaged and educated middle school students, high school students, and families about science and engineering from

Photos by Christine Wang. A conference attendee listens to high frequency sound waves as instructed by Shon Isenhour, SMRP vice chair. SMRPs booth at the USA Science and Engineering Festival.

wanted: SMRP Memorabilia for 20th anniversary


keepsakes, and memorabilia to personally celebrate SMRPs 20th Anniversary. Include your name, company, and description of the photograph or keepsake, and send to Christine Wang (cwang@kellencompany.com).

e need your help! In highlighting our members and SMRPs impact over the past 20 years, please send old photos,

Established in 1992, SMRP is honored to celebrate its 20th anniversary this year. This milestone is a path to celebrating the excellence SMRP has accomplished by providing value for individual practitioners and sustaining maintenance and reliability best practices for companies.

Call for Board and officer nominations

ts time to announce the Call for Nominations for the 2012-2013 SMRP Board of Directors.

We invite member input on identifying qualified and motivated nominees and encourage each SMRP member to consider serving as a Board member or officer to help SMRP remain vital and prosperous. Nominations for these seats must be made by July 13, 2012. Please send your nominations to Shon Isenhour, sisenhour@gpallied.com or Jon Krueger, jkrueger@kellencompany.com.
June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

Dont miss your chance to be a part of the exciting changes and growth of your organization. This October, three (3) Director Positions (BoK Director, Education Director, Certification Director) and one (1) Secretary Position will open on the SMRP Board of Directors.

22

SMRP SolutionS

MeMBeR CoRneR

Smithsonian Support Centers Secrets Revealed to SMRP Members

or the second Executive Meeting of the year, SMRP members congregated in Washington, D.C. and had the chance to expe-

groups to visit specific locations arranged by Leslie Schuhmann. Specific areas visited were the Anthropology storage areas and collections in Pods 1 and 4, and Mineral Science and LAB/ Biorepository in Pod 3. Comments from SMRP members were highly favorable. Being able to see behind the scenes at the Smithsonian, SMRP members left with an appreciation of the depth of the Smithsonian that goes well beyond its walls.
During the SMRP Executive Meeting, members were given a behindthe-scenes tour of the Smithsonians treasures.

rience an exclusive tour of the Smithsonian Institutions Museum Support Center (MSC). Dedicated in 1983 in Suitland, Md. on four and a half acres of land, the MSC hosted a tour typically not open to the public. Featuring a combination of more than 30 million of the nations treasures stored in the giant collection storage pods, the tour allowed members to gain an understanding of not only the treasure but also the complexity in operating and maintaining the facilities that house collections and artifacts. The morning started off with introductory remarks by the Smithsonian Facilities Manager, followed by a presentation by Dr. Marion Mecklenburg on the effect and impact of building environment on collections, materials, and structures. He summarized his research in this area, especially in regard to artwork. Following Mecklenburgs presentation, Liz Dietrich discussed the purpose, mission, and organization of the MSC. After this initial round of presentations, the members were broken up into two
ers for Pra tion cti cti ti ra

Photo by Rick Fary

ers on

By P

EC

IAL

INTEREST

RO

Pharma and Biotech

Pharma & Biotech Sig adds new Value to SMRP


and reliability, Failure Modes and Effects Criticality Analysis (FMECA) in Pharmaceuticals, Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) work management, and pharma/biotech benchmarking. With early success, the group is now looking to grow its membership. If you are interested in joining, please send your name, company, and your interests to cwang@kellencompany.com.

he Pharma/Biotech SIG has made quick progress in establishing an active group of industry practitioners. With a full

agenda of topics, the group met at Eli Lilly in Indianapolis this past March, followed up with bi-weekly conference calls. The groups active agenda includes fostering several sub teams focusing on: Commissioning and Qualification (C&Q) links to maintenance

a Benefit to Students: the SMRP Scholarship Program

o encourage academic institutions and their students to consider careers in maintenance and reliability, and also provide

UP

a way to offer a great benefit to SMRP member families, the SMRP annually awards three scholarships for the upcoming school year: The SMRP Scholarship and SMRPCO Scholarship offer M&R students a chance to pursue a career in the M&R industry.

SMRP executive Meeting to Feature Jack Daniels Distillery tour

sion of SMRP and Calhoun Community College in Decatur, Ala. with a tour of the college, a Board and Foundation Meeting,

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

SP

The Higher Standards Scholarship is granted to a student from an SMRP member regardless of college/university major. To apply for SMRP scholarships, visit www.smrp.org under

the Education tab, then Scholarships tab for application forms. Deadline for scholarship applications is August 2012. For more information, contact Devane Casteel dcasteel@kellencompany.com).

he next Executive Meeting will be held July 24-26 in Huntsville, Ala. The three-day event will include a joint ses-

Executive Member reception, and an executive tour and group lunch at the Jack Daniels Distillery in Lynchburg, Tenn. If you are an Executive Member of SMRP and would like to register, contact Marella Bivins at mbivins@kellencompany.com.
SMRP SolutionS

23

ChaPteR RounD-uP

houSton ChaPteR
The Houston Chapter hosted its 2012 second quarterly luncheon May 10 at Battleground Golf Course Club at the San Jacinto Battleground, where Texas won its independence from Mexico on April 21, 1836. Featuring guest speaker Kim Hoyt, manager of manufacturing excellence for Huntsman Performance Products, the luncheon served as an educational opportunity for the 67 attendees on improving safety and productivity of the processes at Port Neches facilities. Attendees also learned about improving equipment uptime, eliminating incidents, and Project Zero - a four square mile chemical facility located in southeast Texas. The Maintenance and Reliability Symposium (MaRS) is an annual meeting produced by the SMRP Houston Chapter. MaRS 2012 Conference, SMRP 6th Annual Maintenance and Reliability Symposium, will be held August 2224 at Moody Gardens Hotel and Convention Center in Galveston. MaRS is the Houston chapters fulfillment of its mission to provide educational opportunities for current industry practitioners and future maintenance and reliability professionals. The MaRS event is supported by the Texas Chemical Council (TCC) and the Associated Chemical Industry of Texas (ACIT) for its training value and networking opportunities for the industrys newest generation of maintenance and reliability engineers. Additionally, proceeds from MaRS are used to provide scholarships for engineering students and technicians enrolled in degree plans/programs in related fields of study. Attendance at MaRS is open to all interested parties. You do NOT have to be a member of SMRP. Registration for MaRS is $200 per person before August 1 and $250 after August 1. Please visit www.smrphouston.org to register, sponsor, and for more information.

uPCoMing eVentS:
When: August 22- 24, 2012

What: Houston Chapter - MaRS 2012 Conference, SMRP 6th Annual Maintenance & Reliability Symposium Where: Moody Gardens Hotel and Convention Center 7 Hope Blvd., Galveston, Tex.

Chapter ContaCts Chair: Steven Eubanks Steven.Eubanks@tpcgrp.com Vice-Chair: Jimmy Jernigan James.Jernigan@lyondellbasell.com Secretary: Doug Henry Treasurer: Greg Dunn Program Chair: Ed Foster Past Chair: Clay Naiser Doug.Henry@Petrofac.com gdunn@turner-industries.com edfoster@mundycos.com Clay.Naiser@shell.com

Kim Hoyt of Huntsman Performance Products, discussed safety and process productivity.

inDiana ChaPteR
The Indiana Chapter hosted its 5th Annual Maintenance and Reliability Conference March 20 at the Eli Lilly MQ Learning Center in Indianapolis. IndyCon received the highest attendance of the five conferences to date with 109 attendees (84 conference attendees and 25 vendors). IndyCon featured keynote speaker Ed Stanek, president of LAI Reliability Systems, Inc. He presented, Obtaining Balance: Process Efficiency While on the Road to Reliability. Other practical presentations relating to current maintenance and reliability issues and opportunities to take CMRP or CMRT exams were also offered to attendees.

uPCoMing eVentS:
What: Indiana Chapter June Meeting When: June 12, 2012 Where: Polaris Laboratories, Zionsville, Ind. The Board of Directors of the SMRP Indiana Chapter has set up a tour of the Polaris Laboratories for the first meeting of

24

SMRP SolutionS

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

ChaPteR RounD-uP

the year. On June 12, the Indiana Chapter will give members an opportunity to revisit the principles and tools involved in tribology or the science of lubrication. Please contact Earl Hill, 317-726-1236, eshill@loma-consulting.com, if you would like to attend. Chapter ContaCts Chair: Rick Kocken Vice-Chair: Kevin Clark Treasurer: Dennis Clark Secretary: Earl Hill Past Chair: Jeff Haverly rkocken@lilly.com kclark@practive-inc.com boilerden@sbcglobal.net eshill@loma-consulting.com jshave229@lilly.com

Board Member: Dave Humphrey james.d.humphrey@allisontransmission.com Board Member: Jim Shackelford jshackelford@peabodyenergy.com Board Member: Jim Taylor jim.taylor@machineryhealthcare.com

ne FloRiDa ChaPteR
The Northeast Florida Chapter held a maintenance conference and plant tour, May 24 at the JEA Northside Generating Station in Jacksonville, Fla. For the event, there was an extensive maintenance conference agenda planned out for SMRP members and non-members to attend. Topics of planning and scheduling, asset management, fluid cleanliness management, and a full tour of JEA Power Station were covered. The lunch and learn also included a demonstration of Palls HLP6 Fluid Conditioning Purifier, which is critical to operation Chapter ContaCts Chair: Doc Palmer Secretary: Walter Simpson Treasurer: Debbi Gray Historian: Roger Collard docpalmer@palmerplanning.com walter.simpson@rayonier.com debbi.gray@wyle.com roger.collard@wyle.com Vice-Chair: Robert Schindler robertschindler@bellsouth.net and reliability of systems involved in power generation. The next chapter event will be held in September.

noRth texaS ChaPteR


The North Texas 2012 Kick-Off Meeting was a great success at the Coca-Cola Syrup Plant in Dallas, April 12. Featuring a well-received speaker from the chapter membership, Al Poling, of Solomon Associates, presented Reliability and Maintenance The Path to World Class Performance based on his studies as the project manager for Solomons International Study of Plant Reliability and Maintenance Effectiveness (RAM Study). Al was formerly the technical director for SMRP from 2008 to 2010, Chapter ContaCts Chair: Co-Chair: Director of Membership: Board Member: Board Member: Board Member: Board Member: Board Member: Kevin Alewine Todd Bowman Scott Schaffer Scott Meador Rob Wallin kalewine@shermco.com tbowmn@juno.com sshaffer@pcb.com smeador@shermco.com Robert.Wallin@luminant.com Kirk Blankenship Heath Williams 57kirk@sbcglobal.net heath.williams@viega.com where he worked with reliability and maintenance professionals through the Best Practices, Benchmarking, and Maintenance and Reliability Knowledge committees. Attendees also had the opportunity to tour one of Coca-Colas well thought of facilities, which has been in operation in Dallas for many years.

The North Texas Kick-off Meeting was held at a Coca-Cola syrup plant in Dallas.

to be an SMRP chapter member, you must join SMRP. if your chapter has an event to talk about or for more information on chapter membership, contact Christine wang at cwang@kellencompany.com.

Larry Goodpasture lgoodpasture@gpallied.com

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

SMRP SolutionS

25

MARCH 17, 2012 MAy 21, 2012 new MeMBeRS

Enobong Agbasonu Shell Petroleum Development Company, Nigeria Manuel Rosas Aguilar Offshore Technical Assistance Haroon Akhtar Honeywell Mohammed Al-Hajri Saudi Aramco Ahmad Alkhaldi Kuwait National Petroleum Company (KNPC) Oscar Antunez Dow Chemical Elsa Anzalone Invensys Operations Management David Armstrong Hendrickson Canada ULC Matt Arndt Materion Mike Aroney GPAllied Mike Barok eMaint Enterprises, LLC Michael Berkey Merck & Co., Inc. Douglas Berlin Reliability Resource Consultants of GA LLC Dave Bertolini People and Processes, Inc. Jeff Blaske Accenture John Bowen Merck & Co., Inc. William Brown Elliott Company
26 SMRP SolutionS

James Brown, II Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. Jimmie Bowling GPAllied Alison Buckle Anheuser-Busch Inc. Manuel Lopez Buenrostro Serco S.A. de C.V Brian Bulman Flowserve Mike Burchfield Gerdau Kyle Burnett

David Dezarn Caraustar Industries, Inc. Darrell Dial Johan Dreyer ARMS Reliability Chad Driskill Sekisui Specialty Chemicals Andre Droste Dmitri Dubin General Mills Garland Edgerton Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. Lawrence Eidson

Michael Bybee Schreiber Chris Callaway Corning Christine Cartwright Enterprise Products Brian Cashimere Carestream Health Inc. Christopher Channell Thomas Cline Roche Joseph Coffman Francis Concemino Inland Empire Utilities Agency Kevin Cowger Merck & Co., Inc. Patrick Craig Willy Davidson Oiltanking Partners, L.P.

Jay Electric James Elliott Henkel Mike Emert Gerdau Donald Enslen Merck & Co., Inc. Joseph Ervin Roche Marc Esplin Merck & Co., Inc. Udayashankar Ganapathy Suncor Energy Jeremy Gartman ATK Jose Garcia Garza Serco, SA de CV Mike Gehloff GPAllied Lance Dean Ginest

Roger DeBlois Flowserve

Orange County Sanitation District

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

MARCH 17, 2012 MAy 21, 2012 new MeMBeRS

Shaft Alignment

Larry Goodpasture GPAllied Daniel Goodrich CTC- Vibration Analysis Hardware Daniel Gonzalez Quanterion Solutions Javier Gonzalez Chevron Carole Gorman Honeywell Samuel Greene Lane Limited Earnest Grenier Genzyme Maureen Gribble UE Systems Rick Guzman Schreiber Foods, Inc. Jimmie Hanks MRG Solutions Daniel Harbaugh The City of Havelock Don Hataway Ensco International John Heideman Control Southern Gregorio Herrera Hernandez Serco S.A. de C.V. Bradley Hill Schlumberger Steve Hivner Carestream John Holmes Mainnovation Inc.

Derek Iltis Life Cycle Engineering, Inc. Alexander Ionov TNK-BP Chris Jackson Luminant Erin Johnson Merck & Co., Inc. James Johnson Merck & Co., Inc. Robert Johnson Eddy Packing Company Michael Johnston T.A. Cook Preston Jolly Technology Transfer Services, Inc William Jones StarTech Instrument Park Joy Merck & Co., Inc. William Keeter GPAllied Bill Kilbey GPAllied Robert Kimbrough Michelin Tire Corp Clark Kimmel People and Processes, Inc. David Kite Merck & Co., Inc. Shannon Klabnik MIPRO Consulting Edmund Knetig The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
continued on page 28

& Geometric Measurement

Vibration Analysis

Rotalign ULTRA

& Balancing

VIBXPERT II
h Watc S IDEO e V Onlin

Easy-to-use solutions for your maintenance needs!


Sales Rentals Services

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

305-591-8935 www.ludeca.com
SMRP SolutionS

27

MARCH 17, 2012 MAy 21, 2012 new MeMBeRS

continued from page 27

Thomas Moss Alcan Cable Dennis Mullins PdM Condition Monitoring, LLC Raed Mustaffa Collins Mwamba Cargill

Gerardo Salerno MedImmune Michelle Salmon Roche Randy Sampson Meridium, Inc. Jahir Sanchez Confipetrol S.A. Jeffrey Sanford Chzm Hill Sarah Schaill Allied Reliability, Inc. Erich Scheller GPAllied Steve Schimsky Joe Scoff United States Gypsum Ryan Shepherd Gerdau Christopher Sheridan HDR Engineering Jeff Shiver People and Processes, Inc. Bradley Shy Merck & Co., Inc. Mike Skuratovich Eastern Oil Company Tom Sloan GPAllied Ricky Smith GPAllied Ben Staats West Fraser Cariboo Pulp Doug Stangier Weyerhaeuser

Chuck Kooistra GPAllied Daniel Kurtz Gerdau Rodolfo Landa Offshore Technical Assistance S.C. Robert Latham RSL Consulting, LLC Mike Lazarakis

Tarairwa Ndewere Minerals and Metals Group Bailey Oladunni

Joseph Leeth Merck & Co., Inc. Steven Lindborg, CMRP, CPMM GPAllied Jeffrey Madere Delta Airlines Darin Maheu Hanover Insurance Group Paul Marino eMaint Enterprises, LLC Luis Mas Roche Brian McBroom Williams Midstream Yolanda Enriquez Mendez Serco S.A. de C.V. Frank Mignano SKF Reliability Systems Bart De Moor GPAllied Todd Moran Roche Oratile More Debswana Diamond Company

Lyondell Basell Chemical Company Richard Overman Core Principles, LLC Andy Page GPAllied Timothy Page UGL Services Gene Pargas eMaint Enterprises, LLC Robert Park Capital Power Corporation Trino Pedraza Tammi Pickett People and Processes, Inc. Doug Plucknette GPAllied David Porter McCain Foods Ltd (USA) Jason Price Priceless Enterprises LLC Carey Repasz GPAllied John Rhea Gerdau

28

SMRP SolutionS

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

Steve Thames Freeport McMoran Cooper & Cooler Douglas Tutwiler Merck & Co., Inc. Jason Verly Davisco Foods Cindi Vinette Internet4Associations Frank Vitucci SKF Reliability Joseph Walsh ByteManagers, Inc. James Wang Coca-Cola Bottlers Josh Watson Schreiber Foods Brandon Weil GPAllied Lynn White Schreiber George Williams Bristol-Myers Squibb Billy Wise General Electric/Bently Nevada Larry Wleczyk Green Bay Packaging Ricky Wright Merck & Co., Inc. Ricky Zarate David Zimny IRISS, INC.

Time Management Plus! See the future and act. Identify bearing failure, energy waste and flashover potential before it happens!!
Call 800.223.1325, E-Mail info@uesystems.com, or visit www.uesystems.com/sm1

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

SMRP SolutionS

29

MARCH 17, 2012 MAy 21, 2012 new CMRPs

Adil Alkiyumi, CMRP Petroleum Development Oman

Vien Dang, CMRP Rio Tinto

James Johnson, CMRP Merck & Co., Inc.

Hussain Al-Hasni, CMRP Petroleum Development Oman

David Dezarn, CMRP Caraustar

Greg Julich, CMRP Pfizer

Kenneth Bannister, CMRP Engtech Industries Inc.

Donald Enslen, CMRP Merck & Co., Inc.

Martin Kearney, CMRP ArcelorMittal Mines Canada

Ernest Baptiste, CMRP

Marc Esplin, CMRP Merck & Co, Inc.

Chad Kellner, CMRP MedImmune, LLC

Moris Behar, CMRP Rio Tinto Leo Faykes, CMRP GoldCorp/Musselwhite Mine Michael Berkey, CMRP Merck Brian Flett CMRP Ivara Daniel Blackford, CMRP Allied Frederic Fortin, CMRP ArcelorMittal Mines Canada David Bonfante, CMRP Georgia-Pacific Julie Fowden, CMRP Rio Tinto - Kennecott Utah Copper John Bowen, CMRP Merck & Co., Inc. Rick Gamble, CMRP AEDC/ATA James Brown, II, CMRP Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Daniel Hernandez, CMRP Consultores Asociados A.C. Mark Browning, CMRP Ascend Performance Materials Jeremy Hine, CMRP MillerCoors Kevin Cowger, CMRP Merck & Co., Inc. Alexander Ionov, CMRP TNK-BP John Crossan, CMRP John Crossan Consulting Chris Jackson, CMRP Luminant Power Robert Crull, CMRP MRG Joseph McGroarty, CMRP Plant Services Magazine George McCarty, CMRP Georgia-Pacific Robert McAmis, CMRP AEDC/ATA William Marrs, CMRP Intrepid Potash Kai MacMurray, CMRP Kennecott Utah Copper Luis Laracuente, CMRP Bristol Myers Squibb Jason Langhorne, CMRP Allied Reliability Felix M. Laboy de la Plaza, CMRP Vibranalysis Edmund Knetig, CMRP Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

30

SMRP SolutionS

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

MARCH 17, 2012 MAy 21, 2012 new CMRPs

Michel Michaud, CMRP ArcelorMittal

Randy Sampson, CMRP Meridium

Ramanathan Viswanathan, CMRP Meridium Inc.

Scott Mohr, CMRP GPAllied

Thomas Sasman, CMRP Cargill, Inc.

Michael Weise, CMRP ATS

Roberto Molina, CMRP Celanese

Patrick Schreiber, CMRP Allied Reliability

Jeffrey Wheless, CMRP Novozymes

Thomas Mundy, CMRP Luminant Energy

Christopher Sheridan, CMRP HDR Engineering

Darrin Whisman, CMRP

Robert Williamson, CMRP Tarairwa Ndewerem, CMRP MMG Bradley Shy, CMRP Merck & Co, Inc. Hudson Woodfin, CMRP Boudewijn Neijens, CMRP Copperleaf Technologies Ismael Solis, CMRP Pall Corporation Ascend Materials Strategic Work Systems, Inc

Jameson Newhouse, CMRP Allied Reliability

Thomas Steveley, CMRP Gallatin Steel Co.

NEW CMRTs
Jamie Barth, CMRT

Gregg Pacelli, CMRP Allied Reliability

Thomas Sutton, CMRP RF Micro Devices

Quaker Oats/PepsiCo

Russell Boehm, CMRT Eli Lilly & Co.

Miguel Padierna, CMRP Offshore Technical Assistance S.C.

John Szewc, CMRP PepsiCo Jason Brandon, CMRT PepsiCo

Luis Perafan, CMRP Serco S.A. de C.V.

James Thompson, CMRP UGL Services Linden Ellis, CMRT Metro Wastewater Reclamation District

David Porter, CMRP McCain Foods

Joey Traughber, CMRP Plymouth Engineered Shapes Scott Kacere, CMRT PepsiCo

Casey Raiford, CMRP Georgia-Pacific

Gerald Trodd, CMRP Agrium Inc. Guy Koett, CMRT Metro Wastewater Reclamation District

Ajit Sahoo, CMRP Agrium

Douglas Tutwiler, CMRP Merck & Co, Inc.

Charles Naber, CMRT PepsiCo

June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

SMRP SolutionS

31

CeRtiFiCation uPDate CMRP & CMRt Paper exams: turnaround time from SMRP
The SMRP Certifying Organization (SMRPCO) and SMRP strive to score, process, and mail exam results to CMRP and CMRT candidates within a reasonable amount of timefour to five weeksfrom when the exam was administered. There are a number of variables that may impact the rate at which these results are received.
1

Here are some ways candidates can help ensure their results are mailed and received in a timely fashion: Check the address on the application to make sure it is complete and accurate. The address the candidate places on the application is where the results will be sent. Include your email and phone number so that staff can reach you if there are questions about your application. Pay the exam fee before you sit for the exam. Nonpayment will delay the mailing of results. Remember, results are not released via phone or email. Candidates will be notified of their results by mail only.

For the eight paper exam sessions held in April 2012 (47 exams), results were mailed from SMRP, on average, three weeks (21 days) following the exam date.

1. Turnaround time is defined by the day the exam was administered to when the results were mailed from SMRP.

SMRPCo Sustaining Sponsors


The SMRP Certifying Organization (SMRPCO) has developed a program of benefits for companies or organizations wishing to provide support to the mission of SMRPCO. For an annual contribution of $1,000, sponsors receive discounts on exams, recertification fees, and much more! To learn more, please visit: www.smrp.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3315 aBB relIaBIlIty serVICes adVanCed teChnology serVICes, InC.

duPont elI lIlly & ComPany emerson ProCess management

marshall InstItute mead Johnson nutrItIon merIdIum, InC. merCk & ComPany, InC. moBIus InstItute north amerICa mosaIC nexen InC. noVelIs, InC. owens CornIng PePsICo PfIZer, InC. PredICItIVe serVICes relogICa rIo tInto saBIC InnoVatIVe PlastICs strategIC asset management, InC. (samI) the dow ChemICal ComPany turner IndustIres ue systems ugl serVICes wells enterPrIses InC.

aedC/ata fluor CorPoratIon aesseal, InC. agrIum alCoa InC. allIed relIaBIlIty, InC. aramark faCIlIty serVICes asCend PerformanCe materIals asoCIaCIon ColomBIana de IngenIeros (aCIem) austIn IndustrIal, InC. BarrICk gold CorP. BhP BIllIton BP - gulf of mexICo Bunge CaCI, InC CargIll, InC. CarVer Pa CorPoratIon delta aIr lInes des-Case dreIsIlker eleCtrICal motors InC.
32 SMRP SolutionS

genon energy gPsg - Johnson & Johnson greenwood, InC. gulf soCIety of maIntenanCe ProfessIonals (gsmP) holCIm us, InC. hormel foods IrVIng PulP and PaPer IVara CorPoratIon JaCoBs JaCoBs/maf JesCo maIntenanCe CorPoratIon kraft foods lIfe CyCle engIneerIng louIs dreyfus CommodItIes los alamos natIonal laBoratory lumInant Power maInnoVatIon InC. management resourCes grouP, InC.

wyle laBoratorIes
June 2012 | Volume 7, Issue 3

Discover the hidden treasure in your company

The maintenance manager is under a lot of pressure. The current credit crunch forces you to improve. But where to start? How can you find the hidden treasure in your maintenance department? VDM Inside is the Maintenance KPI Dashboard that provides you with real maintenance intelligence of your cost drivers, performance killers and underlying causes. With VDM Inside you will finally get a grip on your maintenance performance. Want to know more? Go to www.vdminside.com
CONTROLLING MAINTENANCE, CREATING VALUE.
Watch the VDM Inside demo www.mainnovation.com

Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals 1100 Johnson Ferry Road, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30342 USA www.smrp.org

eVent CalenDaR Houston Chapter Call for Panelists for MaRS 2012
Requests Due: June 30, 2012 Contact: Michael.Eisenbise@bp.com

www.SMRP.oRg

July Executive Meeting


July 24-26, 2012 Huntsville, Ala.

MaRS 2012 Conference (Houston Chapter)


August 22-24, 2012 Moody Gardens Galveston, Tex.

SMRP StAff
Executive Director
Jon Krueger 678-303-3045 jkrueger@kellencompany.com

Exam Director
Terry Harris, CMRP 937-371-1644 tkharris10@hotmail.com

Solutions Editorial Department


Dan Anderson Chair, Communications Committee Life Cycle Engineering danderson@lce.com Jayne Gillis Editor-in-Chief 678-303-2979 jgillis@kellencompany.com Christine Wang Editorial Assistant 678-303-3060 cwang@kellencompany.com

Associate Director
Jayne Gillis 678-303-2979 jgillis@kellencompany.com

Product & Business Development Manager


Laura Keane lkeane@bok.smrp.org 281-384-5943

Certification and Education


Tim Kline 678-303-3017 tkline@kellencompany.com

Executive Vice President


Russ Lemieux 678-303-3041 rlemieux@kellencompany.com

Potrebbero piacerti anche