|
| Trying To Maintain |
 When do you fix a piece of equipment that you own? Being able to justify expenditures for repairs can be very fuzzy whether you are looking at your home or your business. I know I'm guilty of putting off repairs and maintenance for as long as possible, all the while thinking that I'm saving money. Recently I read an article by Rick Fedrizzi called 'Do The Math' that made me question the wisdom of 'saving now'.
Fedrizzi quoted David Tod Geaslin, an operations and maintenance consultant from Houston who has done the math and made a clear point about the real costs of delaying scheduled and even un-scheduled maintenance. We all know that the longer we operate a piece of equipment that needs repair, the more it will cost to fix it. A guess would be that deferred maintenance may cost us double in the long run but that would be wrong. The real-world cost would be 15 times the cost of repair and often exceed 40 times. Mr. Geaslin created a formula called the "Inverse-Square Rule for Deferred Maintenance". The rule states: "If a part is known to be failing and the repair is deferred and allowed to remain in service until the next level of failure, the resultant expense will be the square of the failed part."
This is why a $40 brake shoe left in service (until the brake shoe rivets damage the brake drum, the drum ruins the core value of the shoes, the truck breaks down on the road, a second truck and driver need to be dispatched, the load transferred, one driver out of commission while driving back with the tow truck. etc.) results in an expense of the square of $40 ($40 X $40=$1600). If the brake problem causes personal injury, the cost can easily be squared again to $2.5 million.
This rule explains how a leaking $50 toilet valve, if left in service until it overflows, can easily cost the square of $50 to create a total flood damage cost of $2,500 in carpet, pad, electrical, and document destruction.
This is why a failing industrial electric motor bearing valued at $100 can create a $10,000 repair if left in service until failure, and the rotor wipes out the windings and damages the stator.
This rule explains how deferring a $1,000 cleaning of a heat exchanger can easily create a $1 million expense in corrupted product, re-refining, packaging, and shipping costs.
The next time the equipment you own calls out for help, think about the possible ramifications of delaying service. Even better, take an inventory of things you own that will require periodic upkeep and schedule the maintenance before the problems have a chance to multiply.
|
|
|
|
| |
Average Score: 5
Votes: 1
| |
|
