LESSON 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA Day 1

LESSON 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA Day 1 2 Time Lesson 3 (Continued) – Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) Overview 1. Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Analytical Approach 2. Modular Open System Approach (MOSA) and Interface Management 8000 -1030 3. Reliability Growth / Reliability Testing / Failure Definitions and Scoring Criteria 4. Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) Allocation, Modeling, Prediction and Analysis Lesson 4 – Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) / Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) 1. Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis 1030 -1200 2. Root Cause Analysis / Single Points of Failure 3. FMECA Maintainability Information 4. Fault Tree Analysis 5. FMECA/FTA Inputs to MTA, LORA, Product Support Deliverables 1200 -1300 Lunch Lesson 5 –Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA) / Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) 1. Condition Based Maintenance Plus (CBM+) 1300 -1500 L 8 RCM MTA LORA October 1 2018 2. CBM Predictive and Corrective Maintenance Task Inputs to the MTA 3. Maintenance Concept and Maintenance Planning Validation 1

Strategic Concepts – Supportability Tradecraft Task Outputs • RAM Allocation, Prediction, Modeling & • Analysis • • Requirements Flow-down Estimated MTBF, MTTR Reliability Modeling Redundancy Requirements Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis • • • Single Points Of Failure Accessibility/Modularity/Testability Criticality Fault Tree Analysis • Root Cause Analysis • Preventive And Corrective Tasks, Skills, Tools, Test Equipment, Facilities Reliability Centered Maintenance / Condition Based Maintenance • • Preventive Maint tasks, Cost and Schedule Prognostics and Health Mgt Level of Repair Analysis • • Maintenance Concept Repair v Discard Operational Availability Maintenance Cost Maintenance Task Analysis L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 2

LESSON 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA 01 Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 3

What is RCM? Reliability-centered maintenance (RCM) is a process to ensure that systems continue to do what their users require in their present operating context. -- Wikipedia Reliability-centered maintenance (RCM) is a logical, structured process used to determine the optimal failure management strategies for any system, based on system reliability characteristics and the intended operating context. -- DOD Manual 4151. 22 -M; Reliability Centered Maintenance 4

How Do Things Fail? RCM helps us understand how our product tends to fail, so we can identify the optimal maintenance approach. If things follow these patterns, it may make sense to conduct preventative maintenance… …But what if they follow one of these patterns? Does it still make sense? Nowlan, F. S. , & Heap, H. F. (1978). Reliability-centered maintenance. United Air Lines Inc San Francisco Ca. 5

RCM process (JA 1011) SAE JA 1011 establishes a 7 step process for conducting an RCM analysis; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. What are its functions and performance standards, In what ways can it fail to provide those functions, What are the events that cause the failure (failure modes), What happens when that failure occurs (failure effects), How much does it matter if those failure effects occur (criticality/consequences)? 6. What (if anything) should we do about that to prevent it? 7. What should be done if there is no appropriate preventative task? F M E C A 6

7

Sustainment Tools in the Acquisition Process A Materiel Solution Analysis B Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction Concept Decision C Engineering & Manufacturing Development PDR Pre-Systems Acquisition CDR IOC Production & Deployment LRIP/IOT&E Systems Acquisition RCM/ Analysis Functional Analysis (DOD 5000 series) RCM Analysis/ Update Engineer-Focused With Logistics Support FOC Operations & Support FRP Decision Review Sustainment RCM Analysis/ Update (every 3 - 5 years) (or as required) RCM Analysis/ Update Logistics-Focused With Engineer Support The point – it is iterative throughout the lifecycle 8

HIDDEN FAILURE CONSEQUENCES SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OPERATIONAL AND NON-OPERATIONAL CONSEQUENCES No Yes Will the loss of function caused by this failure mode (on its own) be evident to the crew under normal operating circumstances? Will the loss of function or secondary damage caused by this failure mode kill or injure anyone or breach an environmental standard or regulation? Yes (S or E) No Is an on-condition task technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 1 1 A-1 Is there a warning that failure is occurring (Potential failure)? 1 A-2 What is the P-F interval? 1 A-3 Is it relatively consistent? 1 A-4 Can the intended task be done at intervals less than the P-F interval? 1 E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of a multiple failure to a tolerable level? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of failure to a tolerable level? Do the On. Condition Task. No 2 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 2 A-2 What is it? 2 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? 2 A-4 Does the task restore the condition of the component to a level that is acceptable? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of a multiple failure to a tolerable level? Do the Scheduled Restoration Task. Yes 2 4 Yes Do the On. Condition Task. No Do the Scheduled Discard Task. No Is a scheduled failure finding task technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 4 A-1 Does the task confirm that the component is still working? 4 A-2 Is it practical to do the task at the required interval? 4 A-3 Is it certain that the task will not leave the hidden function in a failed state? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of multiple failures to a tolerable level? Do the Scheduled Failure-Finding Task No scheduled maintenance. Redesign may be desirable. Yes No No Could a multiple failure affect safety or the environment? Redesign is compulsory Yes 5 4 Yes No Is there a scheduled discard task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 3 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 3 A-2 What is it? 3 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? Do the Scheduled Discard Task. No 2 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 2 A-2 What is it? 2 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? 2 A-4 Does the task restore the condition of the component to a level that is acceptable? E-1 Are the direct and indirect costs of this task acceptable when compared to the direct and indirect costs and impact of the failure? Do the Scheduled Restoration Task. E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of failure to a tolerable level? Yes 2 No E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of a multiple failure to a tolerable level? Yes Is there a scheduled restoration task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? Is there a scheduled discard task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 3 1 A-1 Is there a warning that failure is occurring (Potential failure)? 1 A-2 What is the P-F interval? 1 A-3 Is it relatively consistent? 1 A-4 Can the intended task be done at intervals less than the P-F interval? E-1 Are the direct and indirect costs of this task acceptable when compared to the direct and indirect costs and impact of the failure? 2 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 2 A-2 What is it? 2 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? 2 A-4 Does the task restore the condition of the component to a level that is acceptable? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of failure to a tolerable level? Do the Scheduled Restoration Task. No 3 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 3 A-2 What is it? 3 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? 1 Is there a scheduled restoration task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? Is there a scheduled discard task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 3 Yes No (N) Is an on-condition task technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? Is there a scheduled restoration task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 2 Yes (O) 1 A-1 Is there a warning that failure is occurring (Potential failure)? 1 A-2 What is the P-F interval? 1 A-3 Is it relatively consistent? 1 A-4 Can the intended task be done at intervals less than the P-F interval? Do the On. Condition Task. Yes Will the loss of function or secondary damage caused by this failure mode have a direct adverse effect on operational capability? 3 3 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 3 A-2 What is it? 3 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? E-1 Are the direct and indirect costs of this task acceptable when compared to the direct and indirect costs and impact of the failure? No Do the Scheduled Discard Task. Yes No No scheduled maintenance. Is there a combination of the above tasks that are technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of failure to a tolerable level? Do the combination of tasks. Redesign may be desirable. Redesign is compulsory Yes No RCM Decision Diagram Rev 2 5/8/2013 9

HIDDEN FAILURE CONSEQUENCES Will the loss of function caused by this failure mode (on its own) be No evident to the crew under normal operating circumstances? 1 Is an on-condition task technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of a multiple failure to a tolerable level? Yes Do the On-Condition Task. 1 SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OPERATIONAL AND NON-OPERATIONAL CONSEQUENCES Will the loss of function or secondary damage caused by this failure mode kill or injure anyone or breach an environmental standard or regulation? Will the loss of function or secondary damage caused by this failure mode have a direct adverse No (N) effect on operational capability? 1 A-1 Is there a warning that failure is occurring (Potential failure)? 1 A-2 What is the P-F interval? 1 A-3 Is it relatively consistent? 1 A-4 Can the intended task be done at intervals less than the P-F interval? Do the On-Condition Task. 1 Is an on-condition task technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 1 A-1 Is there a warning that failure is occurring (Potential failure)? 1 A-2 What is the P-F interval? 1 A-3 Is it relatively consistent? 1 A-4 Can the intended task be done at intervals less than the P-F Yes interval? E-1 Are the direct and indirect costs of this task acceptable when compared to the direct and indirect costs and impact of the failure? Do the On-Condition Task. 10

HIDDEN FAILURE CONSEQUENCES SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OPERATIONAL AND NON-OPERATIONAL CONSEQUENCES No Yes Will the loss of function caused by this failure mode (on its own) be evident to the crew under normal operating circumstances? Will the loss of function or secondary damage caused by this failure mode kill or injure anyone or breach an environmental standard or regulation? Yes (S or E) No 1 A-1 Is there a warning that failure is occurring (Potential failure)? 1 A-2 What is the P-F interval? 1 A-3 Is it relatively consistent? 1 A-4 Can the intended task be done at intervals less than the P-F interval? 1 E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of a multiple failure to a tolerable level? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of failure to a tolerable level? Do the On. Condition Task. No 2 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 2 A-2 What is it? 2 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? 2 A-4 Does the task restore the condition of the component to a level that is acceptable? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of a multiple failure to a tolerable level? Do the Scheduled Restoration Task. Yes 2 4 3 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 3 A-2 What is it? 3 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? Yes Do the On. Condition Task. 4 A-1 Does the task confirm that the component is still working? 4 A-2 Is it practical to do the task at the required interval? 4 A-3 Is it certain that the task will not leave the hidden function in a failed state? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of multiple failures to a tolerable level? Do the Scheduled Failure-Finding Task No scheduled maintenance. Redesign may be desirable. Yes No No Could a multiple failure affect safety or the environment? Redesign is compulsory Yes 5 4 Yes No Is there a scheduled discard task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 3 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 3 A-2 What is it? 3 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? Do the Scheduled Discard Task. No No 2 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 2 A-2 What is it? 2 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? 2 A-4 Does the task restore the condition of the component to a level that is acceptable? E-1 Are the direct and indirect costs of this task acceptable when compared to the direct and indirect costs and impact of the failure? Do the Scheduled Restoration Task. Do the Scheduled Discard Task. Is a scheduled failure finding task technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 2 No E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of failure to a tolerable level? Yes Is there a scheduled restoration task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? Is there a scheduled discard task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 3 1 A-1 Is there a warning that failure is occurring (Potential failure)? 1 A-2 What is the P-F interval? 1 A-3 Is it relatively consistent? 1 A-4 Can the intended task be done at intervals less than the P-F interval? E-1 Are the direct and indirect costs of this task acceptable when compared to the direct and indirect costs and impact of the failure? No E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of a multiple failure to a tolerable level? Yes 1 2 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 2 A-2 What is it? 2 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? 2 A-4 Does the task restore the condition of the component to a level that is acceptable? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of failure to a tolerable level? Do the Scheduled Restoration Task. No Is there a scheduled discard task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 3 Yes No (N) Is an on-condition task technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? Is there a scheduled restoration task that is technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 2 1 A-1 Is there a warning that failure is occurring (Potential failure)? 1 A-2 What is the P-F interval? 1 A-3 Is it relatively consistent? 1 A-4 Can the intended task be done at intervals less than the P-F interval? Do the On. Condition Task. Yes (O) Is an on-condition task technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? 1 Will the loss of function or secondary damage caused by this failure mode have a direct adverse effect on operational capability? 3 3 A-1 Is there an age at which there is a rapid increase in the conditional probability of failure? 3 A-2 What is it? 3 A-3 Is the probability of this failure mode occurring before this age acceptable? E-1 Are the direct and indirect costs of this task acceptable when compared to the direct and indirect costs and impact of the failure? No Do the Scheduled Discard Task. Yes No No scheduled maintenance. Is there a combination of the above tasks that are technically feasible (applicable) and worth doing (effective)? E-1 Does the task reduce the risk of failure to a tolerable level? Do the combination of tasks. Redesign may be desirable. Redesign is compulsory Yes No RCM Decision Diagram Rev 2 5/8/2013 11

RCM / Modeling & Simulation Integration - AAV Analysis completed in September 2013 - Objectives: • Evaluate the current impact of the RCM recommendations • Evaluate reliability changes due to RCM implementation • Construct and evaluate a high-resolution simulation to assess the long-term impact of RCM PMCS modifications. • Recommend possible modifications to RCM PMCS recommendations - Metrics Performance of each alternative is evaluated with five primary metrics - Cost SOE - Corrective Maintenance DST - Operational Availability (AO) RCM - Mean Down Time (MDT) M&S - Materiel Availability (AM) 12

RCM Five Year Comparison • • Pre-RCM 11 checklists 64: 03: 12 hours total if each checklist performed once Many redundant tasks Limited compliance – “Rainbow” Sheets: daily check of 68 pages of tasks broken into groups, performed over 4 -week period • • • Post-RCM 15 checklists 19: 37: 53 hours total if each checklist performed once Greatly reduced redundancy Greater compliance Eliminate unnecessary tasks Deadline criteria clearly defined 13

1 3 2 Assessment of Requirement Identified 4 Delivery of Technical Documentation Ye s Requirement Validated 6 Establish Objectives & Boundary 5 Technical Documentation Review 7 8 Failure Mode Estimate Analysis Approved No Provide Exemption Documentation I- Analysis Determination A 9 RCM Review Group Requirements / Responsibilities 10 Submission of Op. For Support Requirements B Orientation / Group Training 12 Development of Operating Context 21 Ye s Analysis Complete E Recommendations Approved Ye s No D ALPS Lead Op. For Support 23 Publish Updated Analysis 22 Ye s Management Audit Marine Corps Systems Command Organic RCM Process E V- Audit Phase 25 24 ALPS & Program Office C No C Program Office Lead No IV- RCM Analysis Technically Correct LEGEND B 19 Consensus on Decisions RCM FMECA 20 14 Confirmation brief 18 17 Phase 2: Decision Phase Technical Audit 13 Review Group Read Ahead III- Analysis Planning 16 Phase 1: Information Phase C D 11 Detailed Documentation Analysis 120 -180 Days prior to IV 15 A II- Analysis Requirements Implement Recommendations 25 Record Disapproval Rationale 26 Assignment to Logistics (PMCS, Tech manual, Training, process), Engineer (Design) IPT 27 Provide Feedback to R 2 A 180 -240 Days A Living Program SUSTAIN - Emergent Issues - Age Exploration - Hardware Changes - Trend/degrader analysis - Document Reviews Etc… VI- Implementation Phase 14 V. 6. 2 05/15/15

Marine Corps Systems Command External RCM Support Process 1 Requirement Identified 4 3 2 Assessment of Requirement Validated No 10 Technical Audit 7 Assistance with Selection of RCM Provider Technically Correct 12 Recommend Acceptance of Deliverables Ye s 8 Analysis Contracted II- External Support Coordination 11 9 Receipt of Deliverables 6 Provide Contract / MOA Language Provide Exemption Documentation I- Analysis Determination A 5 External Analysis Recommended / Approved Ye s External Analysis C LEGEND B Program Office Lead No Recommend Revision of Deliverables ALPS & Program Office C III- Audit Phase ALPS Lead 16 14 13 B Recommendations Approved Ye s No Implement Recommendations 15 Record Disapproval Rationale A Assignment to Logistics (PMCS, Tech manual, Training, process), Engineer (Design) IPT A Living Program SUSTAIN - Emergent Issues - Age Exploration - Hardware Changes - Trend/degrader analysis - Document Reviews Etc… IV- Implementation Phase 15 V. 6. 2 05/15/15

Product Support Planning Impact on Readiness (must watch in presentation mode due to animations) (not to scale) M L D T Uptime (MTBF) M Down L PMCS D (MPM) T M L D T Down PMCS (MPM) M L D T Downtime (MTTR) Corrective Maint M L D T Uptime (MTBF) Downtime (MTTR) Corrective Maint 1) This is Inherent Availability (Ai) – the reliability and maintainability inherent to the design (focused solely on Corrective Maintenance upon failure). This assumes you have the right part, the right person, with the right skills and special tools immediately available to correct the problem at the time and place of failure (unlimited spares, no delays). This is typically the only availability measured during system development (pre- MS C) since the training and supportability package are not yet in place. This will be the highest availability measure (e. g 90%) 2) But, based on supportability analysis (RCM), we have an optimized PMCS approach to prevent failures that have unacceptable consequences. Therefore we have some planned and scheduled maintenance at various intervals (time, miles, etc. ) This is Achieved Availability (Aa). By having a larger denominator, this will be lower (e. g. 80%). Can’t be accurately measured until AFTER maintenance planning has occurred. MLDT and MPM is the result of how well we plan these during acquisition and manage them throughout O&S 3) However, there are other delays related to maintenance (supply support, training of maintainers, accuracy of manuals, availability of maintainers, presence (and need) of special tools or diagnostic equipment, delays related to trouble reporting, etc (the 12 IPSEs)). This additional Administrative and Logistics Delay combine to produce Operational Availability (Ao), lower than Aa (e. g. 60%). This represents the mandatory KPP and what the Op. Fors experience. Can’t be accurately measured until the entire product support package is in place, typically AFTER fielding (OT&E to a limited extent). This is what Acquisition Logisticians do. LOGISTICIANS MANAGE (REDUCE) DOWN TIME TO INCREASE READINESS (Availability). We optimize this through iterative Supportability Analyses (FMECA, FTA, RCM, LORA, MTA, SORA). In design, this helps support sustainment planning. Post fielding, this uses actual data to refine execution (increased readiness, reduced cost). Proof: AAV RCM Analysis reduced PMCS (MPM) by 70%, thereby reducing MDT by 32%, thereby increasing Availability (Aa) by 6. 4% Ai = MTBF/MTBF + MTTR (MTTR = Fault detection + CM + verify) Aa = MTBM/MTBM + MTTR + M PM (MPM = Avg of maint cycle time for PM) Ao = MTBM/MTBM+MDT (MDT = MLDT + MTTR + MPM) (MLDT = Supply + … (essentially the 12 IPSEs) 16

LESSON 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA 02 Condition Based Maintenance Plus (CBM+) L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 17

02 Condition Based Maintenance Plus (CBM+) Maintenance based on the evidence of need Mechanical Brakes Water Pumps Materials Engine Oil Lubricants Tires Analytics Wear out Curve Accelerated Testing Criteria Cost / Safety Reliability L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 18

Bath Tub Curve CBM+ architectures are used to determine the system’s failure rate as the system transitions through the life cycle. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 19

CBM+ IMPLEMENTATION Enabling Technologies Current CBM+ Technology Trends Prognostics Miniaturization of sensors Diagnostics Development of sensors that enable monitoring of debris in lubricating oils and the condition of oils themselves Portable Maintenance Aids Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals Interactive Training Data Analysis Integrated Information Systems Automatic Identification Technology L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 Sensors that enable the detection severity of hidden corrosion and general corrosiveness of environments and acoustic and vibrational measures Life-prediction methodologies and real-time computations Signal processing and multi-sensor data fusion Intelligent reasoning and control 20

CBM+ INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK CAPABILITIES AND FEATURES Hardware System health monitoring and management using embedded sensors; integrated data bus. Software Decision support and analysis capabilities both on and off equipment; appropriate use of diagnostics and prognostics; automated maintenance information generation and retrieval. Design Open system architecture; integration of maintenance and logistics information systems; interface with operational systems; designing systems that require minimum maintenance; enabling maintenance decisions based on equipment condition. Processes RCM analysis; a balance of corrective, preventive, and predictive maintenance processes; trend-based reliability and process improvements; integrated information systems providing logistics system response; CPI; Serialized Item Management. Communications Databases; off-board interactive communication links. Tools Integrated electronic technical manuals (i. e. , digitized data) (IETMs); automatic identification technology (AIT); item-unique identification; portable maintenance aids (PMAs); embedded, data-based, interactive training. Functionality Low ambiguity fault detection, isolation, and prediction; optimized maintenance requirements and reduced logistics support footprints; configuration management and asset visibility. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 21

CBM+ AND PERFORMANCE BASED LOGISTICS v Performance-driven outcomes means the performance of all provider activities is measured against clearly defined outcomes at the weapon system level. Within that context, PBL is an approach for weapon system and equipment support that employs the acquisition of support from “best value” sources as an integrated, affordable performance package designed to optimize system readiness. v As CBM+ helps focus the maintenance process on maximizing weapons and equipment readiness with optimum resource allocation, it fully complements the PBL concept. v CBM+ becomes an essential factor in attaining the performance-based objectives in the area of maintenance. Do. D policy prescribes PBL as the preferred product support strategy. [30] CBM+ tools, technologies, and processes achieve desired outcomes through continuous improvement of weapon system performance and availability, along with a reduction in ownership costs. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 22

CBM+ AND SYSTEMS ENGINEERING v PMs, systems engineers and life-cycle logisticians should consider the effect system development decisions, to include CBM+ will have on the long-term operational effectiveness, suitability and affordability of the system. v The life-cycle logistician must ensure CBM+ implementation is addressed in the early in system’s design and also ensure the maintenance support concept and plans will be flexible and responsive enough to support the design and resultant or evolving system. v Affordable support is dependent upon whether reliability and maintainability and the necessary tools and information, such as prognostics and diagnostics, are built in during system design and procurement. It is essential that CBM+ managers actively participate in the system engineering IPTs to ensure maintenance approaches are balanced with program schedule, technical performance, and cost objectives. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 23

CBM+ AND RELIABILITY CENTERED MAINTENANCE v RCM is an analytical process that assists maintenance managers in determining appropriate methods of maintenance when considering costs, accuracy, and availability of required data, and the specific failure mechanism being analyzed. Opting for condition based maintenance strategies is one possible outcome of an RCM analysis. v The synergy between RCM and CBM+ relates to the use of applicable CBM+ technologies and methods to support management decisions for selecting and executing maintenance tasks. By linking RCM and CBM+ as complementary management tools, maintainers can significantly strengthen the rationale for choosing the most technically appropriate and effective maintenance task for a component or end item. In particular, the availability of timely and accurate condition assessment data made available through CBM+ capabilities will inevitably improve the RCM analytical determination of failure management strategies L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 24

CBM+ ACQUIPEDIA ARTICLE https: //www. dau. mil/acquipedia/pages/articledetails. aspx#!503 CBM+ Guidebook https: //www. dau. mil/guidebooks/Shared%20 Documents%20 HTML/Condition%20 Based%20 Maintenance% 20 Plus%20(CBM+)%20 Guidebook. aspx#toc 155 L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 25

LESSON 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA 03 Maintenance Task Analysis L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 26

MAINTENANCE TASK ANALYSIS MTA – PURPOSE & OUTPUT L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 27

THE ROLE OF THE MTA IN THE SUPPORTABILITY ANALYSIS PROCESS L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 28

MAINTENANCE TASK ANALYSIS (MTA) PROCESS STEPS L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 29

MAINTENANCE TASK ANALYSIS MTA – PURPOSE & OUTPUT PURPOSE To identify the maintenance tasks to be performed, as well as environmental factors and safety concerns to personnel and equipment appropriate to performing the task. PROCESS Work in conjunction with system engineers, maintenance analysts/technicians, and human factors/safety engineers to integrate information from FMECA, FTA, and RCM Analysis/CBM+, the Product Support Analysis and Product Support Data, to establish a comprehensive maintenance capability, L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 and ensure cost effective OUTPUT • Detailed steps for performing the task, including safety-related activities, set-up, testing, repair and verification. • Manpower required to perform the task • Skill level(s) of technician(s) • Number of technicians • Number of labor hours • Required tools or special equipment to perform the task • Required lubricants, solvents, kits, safety gear, 30

MAINTENANCE TASK DATA AND GEIA-STD-0007 LPD L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 31

MAINTENANCE RESOURCES AND POLICY L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 32

MAINTENANCE CONCEPT ALIGNMENT L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 33

LOGISTICS PRODUCT DATA L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 34

POPULATING LOGISTICS PRODUCT DATABASE L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 35

SUPPORTING ANALYSES / MAINTENANCE CONCEPT GUIDELINES L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 36

SOURCES OF MAINTENANCE TASK INFORMATION L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 37

DETERMINING THE MAINTENANCE LEVEL L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 38

MAINTENANCE TASK AND SKILL SPECIALTY CODES This information is used to develop the technical manuals, as well as system-specific training. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 39

EVALUATING THE MAINTAINABILITY OF THE DESIGN Maintainability’s attributes of Accessibility, Modularity and Testability combine to decrease maintenance time by enabling the rapid fault detection, isolation, removal, repair and check-out of all preventive and corrective events. . L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 40

MAINTENANCE TASK EVALUATIONS Are Tasks balanced from the perspective of their complexity and the assigned level of repair? Are design changes appropriate? Have those tasks been validated against the maintenance concept and the maintenance planning to date? How does the Maintenance Summary Report aid in establishing maintenance planning? L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 41

MAINTENANCE TASK ANALYSIS SUMMARY L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 42

LESSON 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA 04 Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 43

LEVEL OF REPAIR ANALYSIS LORA – PURPOSE & OUTPUT The LORA’s output is recommended Source, Maintenance, and Recovery (SM&R) codes representing the most economical outcome for the maintenance level at which components are restored to an operational status. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 44

THE ROLE OF LORA IN SUPPORTABILITY ANALYSIS System Definition L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 System Definition describes the support environment by setting boundaries such as: • The number of maintenance levels/responsibilities at each level • The number of shops at each maintenance level • Diagnostic capabilities/equipment at each shop (org/intermediate/depot) • Extent of contractor repair 45

TYPES OF LEVEL OF REPAIR ANALYSIS Non-Economic LORA Analyzes high level concepts regarding repair by conducting a non-economic analysis to assess and influence the design from a supportability perspective. Identifies and conducts economic analysis to determine if an item should be repaired or discarded, and determines the level of maintenance for that repair in terms of cost and availability. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 46

LEVEL OF REPAIR ANALYSIS LORA INPUTS / SOURCES LORA INPUTS INFORMATION SOURCES The Supportability Environment and repair level constraints The CDD and Maintenance Concept define the supportability environment and repair level constraints. Preliminary Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) and Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) for components The R&M Modeling, Prediction, Allocation, and Analysis output provides preliminary MTBF and MTTR for components. Significant failure modes mitigated by maintenance tasks The FMECA/FTA identify significant failure modes mitigated by maintenance. Maintenance task elements such as process, skill level, labor hours, equipment, and environment. The MTA identifies and validates task processes, and required skill levels, labor hours, equipment, and environment. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 47

ECONOMIC LORA PROCESSES Validating LORA input data is accurate and complete. Quantifying the impact of a variable on meeting Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) requirements and cost constraints. Identifying the most economic repair alternative given Organizational (Field) and Depot repair alternatives and their costs. Evaluating the impact, in terms of Operational Availability (Ao), cost, and manpower and spares distribution, of implementing original maintenance policy constraints instead of least-cost maintenance recommendations. The LORA’s output is recommended Source, Maintenance, and Recovery (SM&R) codes representing the most economical outcome for the maintenance level at which components are restored to an operational status. L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 48

ECONOMIC LORA PROCESS SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS Reliability, measured as Mean Time between Failures (MTBF) Operating Hours Labor hours, measured as Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) Labor rates, Government, Organic and Contractor Support equipment cost and location Supply delays, measured as Mean Logistics Down Time (MLDT), which includes MTTR plus supply and transportation delays L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 49

LORA OUTCOMES INCLUDE ü Recommendations for the most economic maintenance level in terms of adjusted SM&R codes, task codes, and assigned manpower ü Refinements to the Logistics Product Data (LPD) ü Refinements to subsequent MTAs ü Updated Supportability Planning, that influences: v The Product Support Analysis (PSA) Evaluates the performance of the Supportability Analysis to ensure all the appropriate analyses were conducted, including the LORA v The Product Support Package (PSP) Documents the analyses and recommendations that drive optimal repair alternatives, which are then designated and approved as the Product Support Strategy and incorporated into the Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP) L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 50

LORA DEFINITIONS – HOW LOW DO YOU GO? Ø End Item can be the whole weapons system unit, or an assembly; in our scenario, the End Item is the Strike Talon weapon system. Ø Line Replaceable Unit is an essential support item which is removed and replaced at Organizational level (via On-equipment Maintenance); this Organizational level activity restores the Strike Talon (End Item) to an operationally ready condition. Ø Shop Replaceable Unit is an item that is removed and replaced (via Offequipment Maintenance) to restore the LRU to an operationally ready condition. The repair actions at Depot for SRUs are typically overhaul activities involving piece parts, special equipment and master level technicians. One component factor that contributes to least-cost recommendations is whether End Items, LRUs, and SRUs will be: Accessed, diagnosed and repaired Removed and replaced with spare part, while original part is repaired and is then placed back into inventory, or L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 Removed and replaced with spare part, while original part is discarded 51

LORA FOUR STEP PROCESS L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 52

LORA PROCESS – OPTIMIZE POLICY / EVALUATE RESULTS L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 53

LORA PROCESS – OPTIMIZE POLICY / EVALUATE RESULTS L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 54

LORA WORK FLOW MODELING L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 55

LORA OUTCOMES – SM&R CODES http: //www. apd. army. mil/pdffiles/r 700_82. pdf L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 56

LORA OUTCOMES – MAINTENANCE ALLOCATION CHART • The “MAC” identifies the end item Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and identifies the maintenance activities, times, and tools as appropriate to each level of WBS indenture. • The MAC “maps” maintenance to maintenance L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 concept and 57

LOGISTICS PRODUCT DATA (LPD) LORA ELEMENTS L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 LOGISTICS PRODUCT DATA 58

LORA LIFE CYCLE PROCESS L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 59

LORA ACQUIPEDIA ARTICLE https: //www. dau. mil/acquipedia/Pages/articledetails. aspx#!300 L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 60

MTA ACQUIPEDIA ARTICLE https: //www. dau. mil/acquipedia/Pages/articledetails. aspx#!300 L 8 RCM CBM MTA LORA October 1 2018 61