Originally Posted by dnewton3
For anything that requires maintenance, there are three types of PM:
- Preventative maintenance
- Predictive maintenance
- Panic maintenance
Preventative maintenance is what a typical vehicle is set to and serviced by. I don't care if it's a car, truck, motorcycle, tractor, generator, etc ... They all come with a recommended service schedule and list of qualified products to use. These schedules are typically very conservative for two reasons:
1- frequent service can delay/deter problems to a point outside warranty coverage; it can mask issues that are small upon onset that would go unnoticed because the evidence is being discarded with frequent servicing
2- the OEM does not pay for the service, so the cost of frequent service means nothing to the OEM
Preventative maintenance is not based on actual data from equipment health studies, etc; it's a guesstimate by the OEM set to cover worse case scenarios. The upside to this type of PM is that if you follow it and you don't have any issues with the equipment, it will has a propensity to tends towards a long life-cycle of the equipment. It's not cheap to do this, but it's easy to follow and effective. It's not efficient in terms of time/money, but it's effective. Efficiency and effectiveness are two separate topics.
Predictive maintenance is not often practiced. It's harder to do in terms of time investment and knowledge base. You have to be willing to spend some money and time along the way, to get the right info into your hands for making practical, pragmatic decisions. This type of PM can encompass UOAs, thermal analysis, vibration analysis, PCs, noise analysis, etc. Knowing how your equipment runs, and how other similar equipment runs, relative to the exposure and environments they operate in, gives you a very clear understanding of when to service something. UOAs can predict reasonable OFCIs. Vibe analysis can predict bearing failures. Thermal imagines can predict both mechanical and electrical stresses, Etc etc etc. This allows you to track the health of the equipment and make predictable decisions not only about service for the maintenance tasks (oil changes, filter changes, grease schedules) but also when failure would be at increased risk (escalating degradation of the components such as bearings, motors, shafts, etc). PM is not for the uneducated or thin wallet, but in the long term, it can save time and money because you are not wasting money on Preventative changes where good parts or good lubes are tossed out. Predictive maintenance, when practiced correctly, is both efficient AND effective.
Panic maintenance is just that; something breaks because you ignored it. Equipment downtime is now biting your posterior. This is neither effective nor efficient in the long run.
Most people practice a combination of Preventative and Panic. For their cars, they will follow the engine oil changes nearly religiously, but then ignore things like diff fluid changes or wheel bearings, until the item fails. It's oddly perplexing to me; I've talked with people that emphatically use syn lubes every 5k miles in the engine, but have NEVER changed coolant or diff oil. They won't change an engine belt until it fails. They won't change wheel bearings until they fail. A true dichotomy of efforts.
In reference to the OPs point, there are many lubes that do a fine job. The selection of lube can be a smart one (seen within a true predictive program where the lubes are matched to the preferred maintenance paradigm), or a dumb one (selecting a lube in the absence of how/why to use any particular product). Using a conventional oil for greatly extended OCIs is not a smart decision if the OCI is not monitored with UOAs. But that's no more stupid than using a premium syn lube for a "normal" OCI, when all data shows that the extra cost is returning zero wear data differences outside of normal variation.
Using a lube that meets the OEM spec, and following the OEM schedule, does not assure all equipment will last forever. What it does is give a guide to the uneducated masses as how to easily maintain their equipment. It's not cost efficient, but it typically is effective.
UOAs are a tool, just like other predictive tracking tools. PCs, vibe, thermal, etc; they are all tools to track conditions. No tool is perfect, but when used correctly, can be very effective. If you know both the benefits and limitations of the tools, and understand what "normal" behavior is for your equipment, you can make some really great, sound decisions and have a high likelihood of long equipment life. Sadly, this path escapes most BITOGers, because the unwashed masses are too easily influenced by marketing and hype.
Well said Dave
