Generating Maintenance Success: Proactive Maintenance For Power Gen

At its plant known flow crisis? Production and operations are humming smoothly, but things happen, and maintenance work orders are starting to pile up. You are fast with a maintenance backlog of applications, and suddenly every order that comes in is marked "urgent", but in reality it is not.

It is an understandable reaction: scrambled personnel operating with limited time and resources maintenance teams believe that unless an application is listed as a priority, the job is never done. But he does not allow maintenance crews to manage their time more effectively.

This is the situation in which Minnkota Power Cooperative Milton R. Young and middle lane, ND, was in 2012. The production and downtime of the machine are not in the desired station power generation.

Although the union had tried to take a proactive approach to maintenance, with maintenance coordinators designated for programming and maintenance on the plane, as climbing downtime, Young slipped station in a reactive mode.

Most work orders were rated as 1 (emergency) or 2 (urgent), even though there were four Minnkota priority codes in place. Maintenance coordinators have become pieces and chargers go work for supervisors and technicians are rushing to complete the urgent maintenance.

The staff who were not part of the official team of predictive and preventive maintenance (PPM) can perform preventive maintenance tasks without documenting them, and work orders often not completed were closed in the asset management system of the plant.