A value-driven method for the design of performance-based services for manufacturing equipment

Figures & data

Figure 1. Overview of the value-driven method for performance-based services.

Table 1. Exemplary pre-defined questions for Step 1.

Sub-step	Expected outcome	Guiding questions
1A - Business and operations context analysis	Description of business & operations strategy of customer	What are the main strategic priorities and goals?
		How does this plant contribute to them?
		In what sector/s does the company operate?
		Which is its main target market?
		What are the main products connected to this manufacturing site? How is their demand (constant, variable, seasonal)?
	High-level description of manufacturing operations and plant	What is the functional chart of plant departments/functions?
		What is the production process, and its main steps?
		What is the plant layout? Where is the target equipment located?
		What environmental and safety standards are implemented?
1B – Plant and equipment context analysis	Detailed description of target equipment in its operational context	How old is the target equipment?
		When was installed? When was the last revamping activity?
		What are its main functional requirements?
		Which is its expected working time? Does it vary between days, weeks, or months?
		Is the equipment in redundancy with others?
	Detailed description of target equipment related processes and specific requirements in terms of environment and human safety	In case of unavailability of the target equipment, is there a possibility for outsourcing its function? Would it imply an extra high cost or delay in the operation?
		What other equipment or business functions are directly related or affected by the target equipment?
		Is there any hazardous material related to the equipment? If yes, what safety measures are adopted?
		Are working conditions of this equipment particularly critical?
		Does it have potential risk of injuries and / or environmental damage? Are extra safety or preventive measures put in place?
		Have energy consumption peaks or material consumption increases being observed in the target equipment? Is it part of an energy intensive production process?

Figure 2. Value Tree of operational value elements for B2B PSS offerings.

Table 2. Template for value-driven FMEA.

Target equipment	Required function	Functional failure	Failure mode	Effect on operational value elements (Exi)				Failure mode score (Fx)
(It can be considered as a whole or by component)	(It indicates the purpose or mission of the target equipment or its components)	(Total, partial or intermittent loss of the required function)	(Visible or physical evidence of the functional failure)	(It indicates whether the failure mode has a low, medium or high effect on each element)
				Effect on operational value element 1	….	…	Effect on operational value element n

Table 3. Suggested performance measures for each operational value elements.

Operational value	Performance measure	Example of Units
Production efficiency	Production rate	items/hour
	Lead Time	hours
	Work-in-progress	items
Production effectiveness	Actual production/planned production	%
	Manufacturing cycle time	hours
	Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE)	%
Output quality	No. defects or rework	items
	Quality rate	%
	Scrap production rate	%
Input resources efficiency	Energy consumption	MWh or KJ/hour
	Raw material consumption	Kg/hour
	Water consumption	L/hour
Equipment reliability	Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)	hours
	Mean Time To Failures (MTTF)	hours
	Failure frequency	failures/year
Equipment availability	Availability	%
	Mean Down Time (MDT)	hours
	Mean Up Time (MUT)	hours
Equipment maintainability	Mean Time To Repair (MTTR)	hours
Maintenance intervention costs	Total maintenance cost	€/year
	Corrective maintenance cost	€/year
	Preventive maintenance cost	€ /year
	Maintenance Intensity	€ /item
	Maintenance cost over manufacturing cost	%
	Equipment Replacement Value (ERV)	%
Air emissions reduction	Carbon footprint	CO2 emissions/year
	Global warming	CO2 eq. Kg/year
Environmental safety	Environmental damage caused by failures	%
	Environmental damaged caused by maintenance (or lack of maintenance)	%
	Potential environmental damage (near miss) caused by failures	%
	Environment-related non-conformities	%
Waste reduction	Solid-waste generation	Kg/year
	Wastewater generation	L/year
Human safety	Injuries caused by failures	%
	Injuries caused by maintenance (or lack of maintenance)	%
	Potential injuries (near miss) caused by failures	%
Adequate working conditions	Overtime done by maintenance personnel	hours/year or %
	Maintenance personnel on continuous improvement tasks	%
Technical knowledge	Multi-skilled maintenance personnel	%
	Average resolution time	hours

Note. Units of time have been considered in hours or years in the Table; other units, e.g. minutes, weeks, may be more relevant depending on the context and equipment operation.

Table 4. Summary of value scores for the equipment group ‘welding machines’.

Selected operational value elements	Value scores for the operational value elements according to the rating degrees (Vij)			Overall value score for each operational value element (Vi)
	Low	Medium	High
Equipment Availability	0.0147	0.0577	0.1569	0.2293
Production Effectiveness	0.0116	0.0302	0.0840	0.1258
Output Quality	0.0368	0.0418	0.3426	0.4211
Equipment Reliability	0.0183	0.0331	0.1254	0.1768
Technical knowledge	0.0049	0.0241	0.0180	0.0470
Environmental Safety	0.0000	0.0000	1.0000	1.0000
Human Safety	0.0000	0.0000	1.0000	1.0000

Note. SuperDecisions software (https://www.superdecisions.com/) was used for the AHP pairwise comparisons. Inconsistency index was acceptable, i.e. lower than 0.10, for all answers.

Table 5. Value-driven FMEA for the equipment group ‘welding machines’.

Required function	Functional failure	Failure mode	Effect on operational value elements, Exi (Vij, j= Exi)							Failure mode score (Fx)
			Equipment Reliability	Equipment availability	Production Effectiveness	Output Quality	Technical knowledge	Environmental Safety	Human Safety
Perform the welding process according to production standards	F1: Machine doesn’t start welding	One of the components is broken	High (0.1254)	High (0.1569)	Medium (0.0302)	Low (0.0368)	Low (0.0049)	No (0.00)	No (0.00)	0.3542
	F2: Welding out of production standards	Welded piece is outside specification limits	Low (0.0183)	Low (0.0147)	High (0.0840)	High (0.3426)	Medium (0.0241)	No (0.00)	No (0.00)	0.4837
	F3: Machine setup is not appropriate for welding this material	Quality loss that comes out in subsequent operations	Medium (0.0331)	Low (0.0147)	Medium (0.0302)	High (0.3426)	High (0.0180)	No (0.00)	No (0.00)	0.4386
Act as a screen between welding area and production area	F4: Not proper isolation	Isolation system is broken	High (0.1254)	High (0.1569)	Low (0.01156)	Low (0.0368)	Low (0.0049)	No (0.00)	Yes (1.00)	1.3356

Table 6. Overview of service offering alternatives for the equipment group ‘welding machines’.

Service offering	Direct maintenance activities	Indirect maintenance activities	Additional activities	VD	VI	VA	VSO
SO1	Corrective interventions	Criticality analysis	None	0.00	2.28	0.00	2.28
SO2	Corrective interventions	- Criticality analysis - FMECA-based maintenance plan - RAM analysis	- Training personnel - Energy efficiency audit	0.00	6.20	5.96	12.16
SO3	- Corrective interventions - Output quality inspections - Preventive interventions	- Criticality analysis - FMECA-based maintenance plan - RAM analysis	None	1.41	6.20	0.00	7.61
SO4	- Corrective interventions - Output quality inspections - Preventive interventions	- Criticality analysis - FMECA-based maintenance plan - RAM analysis	- Training personnel - Energy efficiency audit - Revamping study	1.41	6.20	8.67	16.28
SO5	- Corrective interventions - Output quality inspections - Preventive interventions - Equipment condition inspections	- Criticality analysis - FMECA-based maintenance plan - RAM analysis	-Training personnel	1.89	6.20	4.87	12.96
SO6	- Corrective interventions - Output quality inspections - Preventive interventions - Equipment condition inspections	- Criticality analysis - FMECA-based maintenance plan - RAM analysis	- Training personnel - Energy efficiency audit - Revamping study	1.89	6.20	8.67	16.76

Note. Corrective interventions do not prevent the negative impact of the failure mode on the operational value elements, therefore, the VD score in SO1 and SO2 is null.