AU7244600A - Asset maintenance management system - Google Patents

Description

P/00/011 Regulation 3.2

AUSTRALIA

Patents Act 1990 COMPLETE SPECIFICATION FOR A STANDARD PATENT *c 0* C V C

V.

C.

CCC

Name of Applicant: Actual Inventor(s): Address for Service: Invention Title: Details of Associated Provisional Application(s).No(s): DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HOUSING RODNEY JOHN GEAR RONALD PAUL DALE DAVID MARTYN HARRISON

INTELLPRO

Patent Trade Mark Attorneys Level 7, Reserve Bank Building 102 Adelaide Street BRISBANE, QLD, 4000 (GPO Box 1339, BRISBANE, 4001) ASSET MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Australian Patent Application No. PQ4869 filed 23 December 1999.

The following statement is a full description of this invention, including the best method of performing it known to me: 2 ASSET MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION THIS INVENTION relates to a maintenance management system for assets and in particular but not limited to a maintenance management system for buildings wherein maintenance services required for elements in the buildings are prioritised in a structural and systematic manner.

BACKGROUND ART Many organisations such as Government departments and corporations have a large number of assets including buildings, vehicles, machinery, equipment and the like. Elements of the assets generally require maintenance services in order to keep them functioning at acceptable quality levels.

At present, in general, persons who use or are responsible for the assets of an organisation submit requests for maintenance services to a central body which is i responsible for allocating maintenance services.

The needs or timings for maintenance services are based on personal judgement of the persons making the requests. They are therefore not structured and inconsistent.

oo S"Further the requests do not indicate asset usage and long term strategic planning for the assets.

The central body accordingly cannot process the requests for services in a systematic manner and it is not possible to generate a reliable priority listing of maintenance services.

Over the life cycle of an asset, maintenance costs usually outstrip the original capital costs of the asset. It is therefore desirable to have an indication whether any of the other alternatives such as refurbishing or acquiring a replacement asset instead of continuing maintenance is more cost effective in long term.

OBJECT OF THE PRESENT INVENTION An object of the present invention is to provide a management system which alleviates or at least reduces to a certain level one or more of the prior art disadvantages.

OUTLINE OF THE INVENTION In one aspect the present invention resides in a maintenance management system for one or more assets of an organisation. The system comprises input means for entering data relating to a set of characteristics of the one or more assets, data storage means for storing the entered data, processing means adapted for processing oO.* •selected data in said storage means to provide a listing of maintenance services for the assets in accordance with a priority determining arrangement.

i' It is preferred that the listing includes a prioritised list of maintenance services for the or each asset. In one form the prioritised list of maintenance services is based on a maintenance ranking of calculated prioritisation maintenance services.

It is also preferred that the listing includes a list of asset conditions for the or go.

each asset so that the assets requiring maintenance services can be identified.

Typically a condition index is provided-for indicating said list of asset conditions.

The list of asset conditions or condition index may be based on averaging weights allocated to elements or subordinate assets.

The or each asset may comprise a plurality of elements and the set of characteristics of the one or more assets includes characteristics of the elements in the or each asset.

4 Typically the element characteristics include asset usage data, element condition data, element performance data, risk exposure data and service effect data.

The list of building conditions or condition index can be provided by the processing means in accordance with the following example of the formula for the priority determining arrangement: asset condition n where condition data for element; Y asset usage data; and n number of elements may relate to one of 5 element condition ratings, namely: Rating Condition 1 Very poor 2 Poor 3 Normal 4 Good 5 Very good Y may relate to one of 5 asset usage ratings, namely: Rating Usage 1 Disposal 2 Minimum use 3 Normal use Prestige Very prestige Another example of the formula for the priority determining arrangement is given below: In this example the processing means calculates a Condition Index for individual assets by averaging the aggregation of the weighted conditions of the asset's subordinate assets (in a hierarchical asset structure) that together comprise the asset.

In this context, the asset hierarchy is as follows: p S P p.

Asset Class Examples Sub-ordinate Assets Complex School, Police Station, Hospital Buildings Building Administration Block, Library, Element Groups Classroom Block Element Electrical Services, Fire protection Elements Group System Element Switchboard, Lighting, N/A Table 1 Asset Hierarchy 6 Asset condition is both specified and assessed using the following general ratings: Specified or Condition Assessed Description Condition Excellent 4 Good 3 Fair 2 Poor 1 Very Poor Table 2 Condition Descriptions The weighting of each asset is represented as its criticality its relative importance compared to other assets). Each asset is assigned an appropriate weighting from the following table.

Asset CRITICALITY Weighting Critical Very High 9 High 8 Above Average 7 Average 6 Below Average Low 4 Very Low 3

S

Table 3 Asset Criticality Weightings The generic method of calculating asset condition is: Asset Condition (WSA x CSA) (WSA) Note, SA refers to Subordinate Asset where WSA is the criticality weighting of each subordinate asset CSA is the condition of each subordinate asset.

The prioritised list of maintenance services or maintenance ranking can be provided in accordance with the following example of the formula in the priority determining arrangement: Prioritisation score (A B) C where A risk exposure data; B service effect data; and C element performance data.

t A may related to one of 5 scores, namely: Score Risk Type Safety Environment Function of element Financial costs Other than the above B may relate to one of 5 scores, namely: Score Service effect Loss of service Service disruption Service nuisance Minimal effect No effect C may relate to one of 5 scores, namely; Score Element performance 9 Failed 8 Faulty 7 Deteriorated 6 Serviceable Good ~Another example of the formula for calculating the prioritised list of maintenance services or maintenance ranking is described below: In this example the processing means calculates a maintenance ranking for :defects and their associated maintenance tasks (ie. maintenance repairs, replacements ooeoo etc). This ranking is a value between 0 and 1000, which can be used when planning maintenance because it facilitates the prioritisation of tasks identified.

The higher the ranking, the higher the urgency or importance of the task identified. The ranking enables planned maintenance tasks to be prioritised over a year time frame. For example, a task with a ranking of 800 or greater should be ¢1 9 carried out within 3 months of identification. A task with a ranking of 300 may not need to be carried out for approximately 3 years.

The Maintenance Ranking (MR) is calculated using an algorithm that takes into account the following: Criticality of the Element with the defect (WEL) Criticality of the Element Group with the defect (WEG) Specified Condition of the Element with the defect (SC) Assessed Condition of the Element with the defect (AC) Risk Factor relating to the potential impact of the defect (RF) Current Business Operations Impact of the defect (BOI) Therefore MR f(WEL, WEG, SC, AC, RF, BOI) f function In further detail, the algorithm is expressed as: MR 10 x V f(BOI, RF, SC, AC) x V( WEL x WEG) Where BOI (Business Operations Impact) selections are: BOI Value Total loss of service Major Disruptions 9 Interruptions 8 Minor Nuisance 7 Nil 6 Table 5 Business Operations Impact (BOI) values RF (Risk Factor) selections are: RF Values Very High High 18 Medium 16 Minimal 14 Nil 12 Table 6 SC (Specified Condition) selections are: SC Values Excellent Good 4 Fair 3 Poor 2 Very Poor 1 Table 7 11 AC (Assessed Condition) selections are: AC Values Excellent Good 4 Fair 3 Poor 2 Very Poor 1 r r Table 8.

The selections of possible criticality weightings for WEL and WEG are Asset CRITICALITY Weighting Critical Very High 9 High 8 Above Average 7 Average 6 Below Average Low 4 Very Low 3 Table 9 12 The relationship f(BOI, RF, SC, AC) can be reduced to f(BOI, RF, AC) because AC is the difference between the Specified Condition (SC) and Assessed Condition (AC).

The following relationship applies: AC (SC minus AC) Value applied 5.00 2.01 2.00 0.01 4 0.00 -2.00 3 -2.01 -3.50 2 -3.51 -5.00 1 Table The relationship between the factors BOI and RF is also very important for this example. The values are represented on the axis in the following matrix (see table cc). The location of the corresponding junction point when these two are applied is also very important as it is located in a particular risk "zone", which in turn determines which multiplier will be to be used to represent the AC value applied above.

13 BOI Business Operations Impact Major Significant (9) Interruptions (8) Minor Nil (6)

RF

Risk Factor Very High 200 180 160 140 120 High 180 162 144 126 108 (18) Moderate 160 144 128 112 96 (16) Minimal 140 126 112 98 84 (14) Nil 120 108 96 84 72 (12) Table 11 BOI and RF Matrix The logic followed is that the higher the Business Operations Impact (BOI) and Risk Factors the higher the urgency of the task. This urgency is then further reinforced (or curtailed) by the difference between the Specified (SC) and Assessed Conditions The wider the gap (ie. condition shortfall) between Specified (SC) and Assessed Conditions the higher the level of reinforcement that the task is a high priority item.

14 Returning to the portion of the MR algorithm f(BOI, RF, AC). This can now be expressed as: BOI x RF x f(AC) f(AC) depends on where the BOI and RF factors meet in the above matrix. For easier explanation, the matrix can be broken into "zones" as follows.

Major Significant (9) Interruptions (8) Minor (7) Nil (6) Very High A A A A A High A B B B B (18) Moderate A B (16)

RF

Risk Factor Minimal A B C (14) Nil A B C (12) f(AC) is calculated using the following table: f(AC) AC Value Zone A Zone B Zone C Zone D Zone E (see Table 1 4 3.25 3 1.175 1 2 4.25 3.688 3.125 2.563 2 3 4.5 4.125 3.75 3.375 3 4 4.75 4.563 4.375 4.188 4 5 5 5 5 Table 13 This then provides the final factor used to calculate the Maintenance Ranking.

Once the ranking is calculated, the following table is used to nominate an approximate time frame within which the work should be carried out. The time frame is added on to the assessment date and a "notional" work start date is estimated.

9*

C

*fl.

C

0** a The following Table outlines the associated Time frames Maintenance Timeframe Ranking 950 1 month 949 900 3 months 899 800 6 months 799 700 9 months 699 600 12 months 599- 550 18 months 549 500 22 months 499 450 24 months 449 400 30 months 399 300 36 months 299 250 42 months 249 200 48 months 199 100 54 months <100 60 months Table 14 The set of characteristic may also include maintenance cost data for the or each asset so that the system of the present invention can provide a table indicating the respective costs of the maintenance services.

17 It is also preferred that the set of characteristics includes capital cost data so that the system can provide a comparison of the maintenance costs and the capital costs.

More preferably the set of characteristics includes frequency of services data so that projected maintenance costs over a period of time can be provided.

Desirably the processing means is adapted to provide an asset condition index for the or each asset. The condition index can be determined according to the formula: Maintenance cost condition index 1 aita cost Capital cost Preferably the condition index includes a first graphical representation of the asset condition in comparison with the asset conditions.

o The condition index may also include a second graphical representation having indications of highest condition index, lowest condition index, means condition index and an indication of the relative position of the asset condition index.

If desired the processing means can be programmed to indicate a condition index over a time period for long term planning of the or each asset.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS In order that the present system of the present invention can be readily understood and put into practical effect the description will now refer to the following drawings which illustrate embodiments of the present invention, and wherein:- Figure 1 is an asset register form for entering details of a complex according to one embodiment of the system according to the present invention; 18 Figure 2 is an asset register form for entering details of a building according to said one embodiment of the system; Figure 3 is an asset module window of said one embodiment of the system of the present invention and the window allows selection of other modules of the system; Figure 4 is a work order entry form in the work order module according to said one embodiment of the system; Figure 5 is a historical work entry form in the historical work module according to said one embodiment of the system; Figure 6 is an operation costs entry form in the operation costs module according to said one embodiment of the system; Figure 7 is an element appraisal entry form in the condition appraisal module according to said one embodiment of the system; Figure 8 is a task entry form for elements in a building according to said one embodiment of the system; Figure 9 is a flow diagram showing a linking procedure between said one embodiment of the system of the present invention and an application programme; Figure 10 is a diagram generation procedure for according to said one embodiment of the system; Figure 11 to 13 show examples of the graphical condition index according to said one embodiment of the system; S"Figure 14 is a table of buildings in a complex generated by the system according to said one embodiment of the present invention; Figure 15 is a table of prioritised maintenance service for a year; 19 Figure 16 is a table of prioritised maintenance services for another year; Figure 17 is a table of planned maintenance services over 10 years; Figure 18 is a main menu of another embodiment of the system according to the present invention; Figures 19 to 21 show forms for specifying conditions of assessment, reporting defects, and allocating tasks for an element in an asset, for said another embodiment of the system; Figure 22 is a form for assessing and specifying conditions for a group of elements in an asset, for said another embodiment of the system; Figure 23 is a form for assessing and specifying conditions for an asset, for said another embodiment of the system; and Figure 24 is a form for assessing and specifying conditions for a group of assets, for said another embodiment of the system.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS *ooo .o The system according to said one embodiment of the system of the present invention includes 5 modules, namely asset register module, work orders module, historical work module, operation costs module and condition appraisal module.

S: Figures 1 to 3 are windows of the asset register module.

Referring to Figure 1 there is shown a complex details entry form on a computer monitor (not shown). As can be seen this form requires entry of asset number, asset description, client, client region, year of plan, client category of complex usage, construction year, occupancy (number of people using the complex), remote factor, budget and attached complexes.

The form also has graphic images of the site plan, site picture and client's logo.

In Figure 2 the data entry form is for details of a building of the complex. The form requires entry of asset number, asset description, client category of building usage, asbestos system, capital value, construction year, total area and structural type.

Figure 3 shows the details of a complex. The assets currently out of the window area can be moved into the window by scrolling and the details out of the window area can be viewed by panning left or right of the window.

Any of the assets of the complex in the Figure 3 window can be selected for further action in any of the 5 modules.

The work order entry form as shown in Figure 5 requires entry of scheduled frequency of service. This is used for a 10 year maintenance plan which will be described later.

The form in Figure 5 shows that the entered asset is ranked 140. The ranking is determined in accordance with the formula: .o Prioritisation score (A B) C In this case A 10 as it is assessed as N or "Other than the above", B 5 and C 3. The system of the present invention use the values of A, B and C to general the score of 30 which is ranked in position 140 in a list of prioritise maintenance e.

o service. Examples of the list is shown in Figures 15 and 16.

*The historical work module when selected presents an entry form as shown in Figure 5 for data entry. As indicated the maintenance services are categorised into breakdown, incident response and routine.

The system of the present invention also has a entry form for operation costs (see Figure 6).

21 The appraisal data entry form shown in Figure 7 is for entering appraisal details made by assessors. As can be seen the building condition is rated optimal or 0 by the formula: (Bn a) Building condition (B -a) and in this case B n 3 and a 3 as indicated in the figure.

The system of the present invention also has a task data entry form as shown in Figure 8. This form is for entering taskrequired following appraisal.

Figure 9 shows flow diagram in which the system of the present invention is linked with a word processing application program.

In the example of Figure 9 the a view document option is selected from the window in Figure 3. The system starts the application program automatically and open a path between the system and the application program. When started the application uses a template document and insert client's logo and site photo in the appropriate positions in the document. Details of the asset for viewing are also imported from a database in a remote file server and from the data storage of the system. This example requires presentation of bar diagrams and the diagram generation module is shown in Figure go Figure 11 to 13 shown a summary of condition index, current condition index relative to other assets and 10 year condition index relative to other index.

Figure 14 is a table including building usage nominated by the client and assessors condition ratings.

Figures 15 and 16 are respectively the current year prioritisation list and the following year prioritisation list.

22 Figure 17 is a table of the costs of planned services for the complex over years.

Turning to Figure 18 there is shown a module selection menu for another embodiment of the system according to the present invention. The modules include "asset register" for registering and editing asset details, "condition assessment planning" for specifying conditions for assessment of elements, groupings of elements, assets, and groupings of assets, "condition assessment delivery" for delivering assessment reports, and other modules as shown.

Figures 19 to 24 a hieracharachical tree structure for selecting regions, complexes, buildings, levels of buildings, element groups, and elements; forms for entering details of conditions of elements, and indications of assessed conditions, for the condition assessment planning module.

Referring to Figure 19 there is shown a window having assessed condition **details for a switch board element in a workshop of Alderley Police Department in oo* Queensland. This form indicates that the desired condition rating is 5 and the assessed condition is 3. It also includes a description of conditions of the switch board.

Tabs are provided for selecting forms for accessing asset details, assessment conditions, defect details, allocating tasks, history, reports, and condition index. Tabs 0: are also provided foe adding editing and deleting details.

When the "Defects" tab is selected the form shown in Figure 20 is presented for accessing defect details for the switch board and to calculate its maintenance ranking.

Selection of the "Tasks" tab allows an assessor to retrieve a etailed description of the task, time for carrying out the task and costing for the task., as shown in Figure 21.

Figure 22 shows a window presented as a result of selecting the "condition index" tab. In this case the condition index as indicated is for all elements in the "Electrical Services" grouping. Figure 23 shows the condition index for the workshop, and Figure 24 shows that for the police department.

The processing means uses certain weightings shown in following table to calculate the assessed condition of the element group "ELECTRICAL SERVICES".

o. *o *o *g Subordinate CRITICALITY Weightin Assessed Weighting x Assets g Condition Condition (out of Internal Electrical Very High 9 3 27 Reticulation Internal Generators Very High 9 4 36 Emergency Very High 9 3 27 Lighting General Lighting High 8 3 24 Switchboards Critical 10 2 UPS Systems Critical 10 5 Energy High 8 4 32 Management System Bldg Services Very High 9 4 36 Management System Heaters/Fans High 8 4 32 unducted Lightning Very High 9 4 36 protection 1 Total 89 320 Table 4 Data table for Calculating Assessed Condition of Electrical Services r Therefore the Assessed Condition of ELECTRICAL SERVICES 320 89 3.6 *(out of *rounded to one decimalplace A specified condition can be calculated by the same method.

Note, the asset class ELEMENT has no subordinates and therefore its condition is manually input not calculated. Possible ELEMENT condition values range from 0.0 to 5.0 (in 0.5 increments eg. The condition of each asset in the classes ELEMENT GROUP, BUILDING, or COMPLEX is calculated using the aggregated average of the weighted resultant (calculated) condition of the asset level below it in the asset class hierarchical structure shown in Table 1.

The maintenance ranking calculation process can be illustrated as follows: For example, on 1 December 2000 a switchboard was inspected and found to be severely overloaded, with signs of excessive heating of wiring in some circuits. The assessor has recommended the switchboard to be upgraded to a larger size.

The assessor then enters details into the system according to the present invention in order to calculate a maintenance ranking and estimate the time by when this task should be addressed.

For the task the following values are entered: Criticality of the Element Switchboard Critical Criticality of the Element Group Electrical Services Very High Specified Condition of the Element Switchboard 5 (out of Assessed Condition of the Element Switchboard 3 (out of 26 Risk Factor relating to the potential impact of the defect Very High Current Business Operations Impact of the defect Interruptions Therefore, from the above tables, the following values are used: (WEL) (WEG) 8 (AC) 3 (BOI) 8 The primary algorithm is: Maintenance Ranking 10 x V f(BOI, RF, SC, AC) x V( WEL x WEG) f(BOI, RF, SC, AC) needs to be calculated. For the calculation this can be simplified to f(BOI, RF, SC, AC) f(BOI, RF, AC) BOI x RF x f(AC) RF o BOI 8 Using Table 11 RF x BOI 20 x 8 160 and falls into Zone A.

AC SC -AC 5 3 2.0 This corresponds to a value of 4 (see Table Using Table 13, a value of 4 in zone A corresponds to a value of f(AC) 4.75 .Therefore BOI x RF x f(AC) 8 x 20 x 4.75 760 Now considering the other part of the equation WEL x WEG /(10 x 8) 8.94 Therefore the Maintenance Ranking is: x (8 x 20 x 4.25)x /(10 x 8) 824 Rounded up to the nearest 5, this equates to a value of 825.

Using Table 14, this corresponds to a Timeframe of 6 months. Therefore, the "notional" start date for the upgrade of the switchboard should take place within 1 December 2000 6 months =1 June 2001.

Maintenance Ranking 825 Recommended Timeframe 1 June 2001.

Whilst not shown, it should be understood that the condition index and the maintenance rankings can be indicated in a table form and/or graphically Whilst the above has been given by way of illustrative example of the present invention many variations and modifications thereto will be apparent to those skilled in the art without departing from the broad ambit and scope of the invention as herein set forth.

oo oo*o•*

Claims (11)

1. A maintenance management system for one or more assets of an organisation, the system comprising input means for entering data relating to a set of characteristics of the one or more assets, data storage means for storing the entered data, processing means adapted for processing selected data in said storage means to provide a listing of maintenance services for the assets in accordance with a priority determining arrangement.

2. The system according to claim 1 wherein the listing includes a prioritised list of maintenance services for the or each asset.

3. The system according to claim 2 wherein the prioritised list of maintenance services is based on maintenance rankings of calculated prioritisation maintenance services.

4. The system according to any one of claims 1 to 3 the listing includes a list of asset conditions for the or each asset.

The system according claim 4 said list of asset conditions is indicated as an index.

6. The system according to claim 4 or 5 wherein the list of asset conditions is based on averaging weights allocated to elements of assets.

7. The system according to any one of claims 1 to 6 wherein the or each asset including a plurality of elements and the set of characteristics of the one or more assets includes characteristics of the elements in the or each asset.

8. The system according to claim 7 wherein the element characteristics including asset usage data, element condition data, element performance data, risk exposure data and service effect data. 29

9. The system according to claim 7 wherein the set of characteristic including maintenance cost data for the or each asset for providing a table indicating the respective costs of the maintenance services.

The system according to claim 8 or 9 wherein the set of characteristics including capital cost data for providing a comparison of the maintenance costs and the capital costs.

11. The system according to any one of claims 8 to 10 wherein the set of characteristics including frequency of services data so that projected maintenance costs over a period of time can be provided. DATED this 20th day of DECEMBER 2000 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HOUSING By their Patent Attorneys INTELLPRO ago* .00. 0 0: **so 000. oe