TABLE OF CONTENTS Applied templates reflect the requirement to customize generic template models to reflect context based upon risk. Templates found in CMMS/EAMS systems of the 1980s and 1990s were effective tools to extend and standardize PM programs. Models used at that time failed to reflect actual field equipment use and risk and to tie tasks back to failures for quick update based upon field experience ( see Fig. 4-1).
The applied template bridges standardization and customization to address the combined need to develop pre-defined, expert standards while customizing to exact equipment requirements ( see Fig. 4-2).
Very detailed equipment PM models can be crafted to accommodate different component designs. Applying these models directly to different components with text documents or spreadsheets requires static application. This is the PM optimization (PMO) approach. The available technology, reflected in documents and spreadsheets, cannot apply complex equipment features based upon contexts because text and spreadsheet formats are limited to flat-file representation. Users cannot depict specific dominant failure modes or custom usage contexts without editing text. One size fits all defines the PMO process and limits application to a few standard equipment categories.
PMO models the most complex versions of equipment with the most conservative intervals and applies these uniformly to all similar component types. Differentiation is limited or non-existent; contextual depth of application based upon risk and service factors can't be accommodated due to the number of...
