Reliability-Centered Maintenance Handbook

1 S9081-AB-GIB-O1/MIAINTR eliability-CenteredMaintenanceHandbookII DTFC' SEP 0 71988nPublished by Direction of Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command88 9 6 252 Revised: October PraA5S:PICATIOTI OF T-HIS IA6 EREPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE)a..U-iUII I SZCURITY CLAFSSIFICATION T b. RESrRI01IL MAAP. ECUAITRC-ASTW91N AUTHORITY 3. DISFRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY OF Rl:I r1Zb. DECLASS i~CATION/DOW',NGRADIFJC SCHEDULE Public release4 PEPim-ORM)NG, ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) S. MONITORING ORGANIZATION iIEPoRr NUMBER(S)S9O81-AB-GIB-Ol0/tiaint S9O81-AB-GIB-010/MAINT6a. NAMAE OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6ib OFFICE SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORTGANIZATIONJ(if applicable)Naval Sea Systems Command CEL-TD_____I&c. ADDRESS (City, Store, and ZIP Code) 7b- ADDRESS (City, Stare, and ZIP Code)Washington, 20362_____Ba. NAME OF FUNDING/ISPONSORING 6b. OFFICE SYMBOL 9. PROCUREMIENT ;NSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBERORGANIZATION j (if applicable)Na~val gqp A7qfgmc nWQ C1EL TD8c.

2 ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIPCode) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING 20362 PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNITW ahhgoELEMENT NO- NO. NO. ACCESSION TITLE (include Secury Classifiction). Reliability-Centered Maintenanrp Handchnork12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)I~a. TYPE OF REPORT 13b TIME COVERED 14 DATE OF REPORT (Year Mhonth, D~y) 15. PAGE COUN1 TfI& SUPPt .MENTARY NOTATION FO ____T ___5IP17. ~ j~ C ota~ DaI tZ\. "Fu-C E~ 7ni on revers~e if necessary and identify by bock number)FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUPR elaibility- centered Maintance, RCMM aintenance19. A3 STrFACT (Continue on reverse if neces~sary and identify by block number) Handbook to introduce reader to preventive Maintenance -Program DesianSpecific applications related to ship as a supplement to MIL-P-2453A(navy)20. DISTRIBITiONIAVAILAILITY OF ABSTRACT 21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONEIBUNCLASStFIED/UNLIMITED [I SAME AS RPT. C DTIC USERS iinrIaF;q fc22a NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b TELEPHONE (include Area C d) 122C.]

3 OFFI(E SYMNBOLCEL-TD2 rt * 9Dt) FORMI 1473. 84 MAR 83 APR edition may be used ur. -.*.aused. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONOF TIlS PACEAMl other editions are am pleased to introduce this Handbook as a proventool for developing improved preventive maintenanceprograms for Navy goal to have a fleet of reliable modern shipsrequires that we be effective in maintaining theirreadiness. Effective preventive Maintenance is a keyrequirement. As maintainers we must focus on not one,but two objectives -- do things right -- and do theright things. This Handbook introduces Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM), a process designed to helpus achieve both of these hope you will find this Handbook both stimulatingand informative as you work to develop and implementRCM-based preventive Maintenance programs in CATOLA,Rear Admiral, United States NavyPrincipal Deputy Commanderfor LogisticsAccession ForNTSGRA iSDTIC TAB~~Unannounced [JustificationDistribution/AvailabilitY CodesAvai nd/oCONTENTSPREFACE.]

4 I. INTRODUCTION TO RCM .. IA. History .. 1B. The Basis for RCM .. 2C. The Environment .. 3D. Scope .. 3!I. PRINCIPLES AND THEORY OF Maintenance .. 4A. What Kinds of Maintenance are There? .. 4B. What is a Function? ..4C. What is a Failure?.. 5D. Failure Detection .. 5E. Consequences of Failure ..6F. Failure Data .. 6G. Multiple Failures .. 7H. The Failure Process .. 8 Summary ..11 III. PREVENTIVE Maintenance TASKS..12A. Time-Directed Tasks .. 12B. Condition-Directed Tasks.. 13C. Failure-Finding Tasks .. 13D. Task Selection .. 13E. Servicing and Lubrication .. 14F. General Inspections .. 14 Summary .. 16IV. THE APPLICATION OF RCM .. 17A. Analyst and Staff Selection and Training .. 17B. Information Collection.. 19C. System Identification and Partitioning .. 19D. Analysis of Systems ..22E. Default Strategy..22F. Periodicity .. 23G. Economics and Cost Effectiveness ..25V. DEVELOPING A PREVENTIVE Maintenance PROGRAM.

5 27A. Designing an RCM-Based Preventive MaintenanceProgram (MIL-P-24534A).. 27B. Master Systems and Subsystems Index(OPNAV 4790/114).. 29C. Functional Failure Analysis (OPNAV 4790/116). 29D. Additional Functionally Significant ItemSelection (OPNAV 4790/117) .. 30E. Functionally Significant Items Index(OPNAV 4790/118).. 32F. Failure Modes and Effects Analysis(OPNAV 4790/119) .. 32G. Hidden Functions Analysis (OPNAV 4790/127).. 33H. Decision Logic Tree Analysis(OPNAV 4790/120)..33I. Servicing and Lubrication Analysis(OPNAV 4790/121)..36J. Safety-Related Design Change Recommendations(OPNAV 4790/122) .. 39 APPENDIX A -Glossary .. 40 APPENDIX B -Planned Maintenance SystemDevelopment Forms.. 42 PREFACE-This Handbook is d fourth edition of one printed early in1979 for use as a training aid. The content has been revisedconsiderably to:C(- Respond to experience gained during the training process;: -Directly support the requirements of MIL-P-24534A (Navy),The purpose of this Handbook - is to introduce you to theideas about preventive Maintenance , program design that are thefoundation for the method called $ Reliability-Centered Mainte-nance (RCM) Applying RCM requires an understanding of theseideas.)

6 Specific application also requires an understanding ofeach ship system, its failures, and the impact of these does not presume that hardware needs preventive maintenancebut uses knowledge about systems, their functions, and theirfailures to identify applicable and effective preventive mainte-nance Handbook is intended to supplement the applicableMilitary Specification(s), not to supplant provides an opportunity to apply reason -- not dogma1-- to preventive Maintenance program design. Well used, it willprovide significant benefits. Where data are limited, unstruc-tured judgement will always be offered as an alternative toanalysis. Whatever the level of data available, a structured de-cision logic such as that described in this Handbook will providebetter decisions. RCM is not a cure-all, but it is a logical wayto attack important preventive Maintenance task needs using theavailable information and knowledge that can be brought to theproblem.

7 Obviously, judgement has a role in this process. Justbe sure that you use it after collecting the facts, not insteadof collecting A belief handed down by authority as true and INTRODUCTION TO RCMA. HISTORYU ntil recently, very few of us had given much thought tological methods for designing preventive Maintenance programs. Inorder to help you get quickly up to speed, the first part of thismanual presents a brief review of the work done before thishandbook was is, before 1960, no record of any effort to lookdeeply into the effectiveness of preventive Maintenance as aprocess for avoiding failure. Those involved in preventivemR;htenance apparently believed so surely that what they weredoing was correct that they saw no need to prove its truth. Theyreacted almost entirely to each event as it occurred rather thangeneralizing their experience by inductive the late 50's, the new presence of jet aircraft fleetsand a growing expertise in the process of analysis stimulatedairline interest in improving the effectiveness of preventivemaintenance for transport aircraft.

8 Since the underlying reasonfor preventive Maintenance is the belief that the reliability ofhardware decreases with its use, the first work examined therelationship between reliability and age, using the techniquesalready used by actuaries in life insurance those who believed that reliability always decreased withage, the results were disappointing. In fact, there was anunexpected discovery of the opposite -- a large number offrequent, early failures, or "infant mortality" that dominatedmany units' life experiences. These had been expected inelectronic hardware, but not in the wide range of hardware inwhich they appeared. It is safe to say that infant mortalityafter rework is likely in all complex 1967, airlines first applied decision tree logic to theproblem of identifying preventive Maintenance task needs. Itprovided an efficient approach, since it directly faced theprimary question of the impact of unreliability on 1968, a decision tree logic formed the basis for the design ofthe initial Maintenance program for the Boeing 747.

9 Since then,similar methods have been used on the DCIO, L-1011, Concorde,A-300, Boeing 767 and the early 70's, this work attracted the attention of theOffice of the Secretary of Defense, the Naval Air SystemsCommand, the Air Force, and the Army. The Navy was the first toapply this new method for preventive Maintenance program design,now called Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM), to bothnewly-designed and in-service aircraft -the S-3, P-3, and theF-4. The first work by the Naval Sea Systems Command to applythis method to ships began shortly prototype application to surface ships was installed ROARK (FF-1053) in 1978. In mid-1979, as the result ofevaluation of RCM on 4 additional FF-1052 class ships, an ongoingprogram for application of RCM to both new and in-service navalships was directed by the Chief of Naval Operations. Installa-tions have been completed, or are in process, in FF-1052, FFG-7,DD-963, LSD-41, LCAC, CG-47, ARS-50, MCM- and THE BASIS FOR RCMRCM is derived from careful consideration of the followingquestions.

10 Some of these were overlooked in previous methods forselecting preventive Maintenance tasks." What does the hardware do?* What functional failures occur?" What are the likely consequences?" What can be done to prevent them?A time-directed approach to preventive Maintenance , in which theultimate task is a scheduled, fixed-content overhaul, has beendogmatically applied to many kinds of hardware. For surfaceships, in particular, very little analysis of in-service experi-ence to validate the need for scheduled equipment overhauls hasbeen done. In fact, the absence of really useful in-servicereliability information about ship systems is the factor thatconstrains the potential benefits of RCM to is Reliability-Centered . Its objective is to maintainthe inherent reliability of the design, recognizing that changesin inherent reliability are the province of than focusing immediately on subsystems or equipmentsand asking "What preventive Maintenance can be done?