Preventive maintenence
Hello friends,
I know PM should be based on risk. However, our maintence team is saying that we can't afford having weekly, biweekly, monthly PM.
We can have biannually for all the machines.
Is it acceptable if not please clarify?
Thanks
The frequency can be whatever you can justify. When I wrote my first SQF program we determined frequency for PM's based on how often they had been performed in the past. Because record keeping sucked in the past, that was based on how often the maintenance manager remembered doing PM's. We wrote up the schedule based on loose notes he had kept, cross referenced to machine operating manuals where possible, and that was enough for us to get the program started.
If you move to less frequent PM's, be ready to refer to your equipment hold logs, downtime tracking, and general maintenance forms when you validate your PM program. So long as you're not running into frequent breakdowns from lack of PM, you can justify extending some PM activities.
Thank you so much!
Good point, but just thinking if there will be no paper work for break downs or downtime or equipment on holfd due to maintenence , Auditor wont know about break downs.. right?
In the early stages you can look at purchase records for replacement parts. Look at the parts being replaced due to wear, failure, or problems caused in your process, and aim for a high percentage of them being replaced by your PM schedule before they fail. Line a few of them up to happen at the same time.
If it turns out you still have too many failures, make the PM cycle shorter. This is what reviews and annual reevaluations are for.
Preventive maintenance plays a crucial role in ensuring the smooth operation of equipment and preventing unexpected breakdowns.
Preventive maintenance schedule should be based on risk assessment. By identifying the criticality and potential impact of equipment failures, you can tailor your maintenance frequency to address the highest risk areas more frequently.
Hi ;)
Check this link Preventative Maintenance Program - IFSQN
We discussed there PPM`s risk assessment. The risk assessment will decrease / increase numbers of checks.
for BRC you must have a risk assessment. I would avoid annual filters check, at least every 6 months, same for compressed air
;)
Here's your Canadian guide that you should be following, along with any GFSI your audited too
PMs should not be based on $$, but on need/risk/legal requirements
https://inspection.c...ry-requirements
Thank you so much!
Good point, but just thinking if there will be no paper work for break downs or downtime or equipment on holfd due to maintenence , Auditor wont know about break downs.. right?
The bosses at my first job seemed to think so. Not just from a maintenance perspective, but in general: "If we have no documented findings, they have nothing to cite us for in audits!"
Cue the 1-year anniversary of our SQF and the reaudit, and QA me had to sit there and watch them try to convince the auditor that we had zero breakdowns or maintenance work done over the year. Welp, long story short, maintenance manager (who was just a well intending old timer in the family that owned it) suddenly was coming to my desk once a week to finish his forms, update his own binder, etc. He actually ended up preferring our work order forms: before, people would grab him all day at random and ask him to look at things. But with the new forms, he'd tell them all to leave him alone unless there was a work order request in his box. I'd help by taking all his PM forms and logging them on single page 12-month calendar, so he could easily see how often he was servicing things.
It worked nice. And it was the start of me learning that having things documented early actually saves me findings in my major audits. If the auditor finds something but I can document that we discovered it and corrected it prior, it saves us a finding in most cases.
I had a maintenace manager that refused to use the PM system to his advantage. They would litterally not replace a $100 on a pm, becasue they didnt have money. Then spend $1000s on the replacement or repare of equipment (food safety concerns aside). Rpeated this process over and over and over.
Then complain they didnt have money. Then state that tracking PM completion was a waste. Further state that he shouldnt have to do the "other than PM equimpent checks" as required by BRCGS.
I dont understand why some maintenance people have no of preventative maintenance in general let alone for food safety.
Thank you so much everyone!
I really appriciate your inputs.
Thanks once again!