JURNAL TEKNIK, (2013) 1-6

1
Abstract In practice, maintenance for manufacture is
complex, either for plant even for every system. It requires
the proper proposed maintenance tasks. However, some
companies have a problem for designing and implementing
maintenance management. In this case, Phonska I Plant PT
Petrokimia Gresik is selected as the observation object of
this research because PT Petrokimia Gresik has not
implemented maintenance based on the reliability. Over the
years, Phonska I Plant had high number of unexpected
downtime days, and it caused the inability of Phonska I
Plant to meet its production target. If this happens, there
would be high amount of lost sale or profit loss. These
problems have been solved by using the design of proposed
maintenance task, which is referred to the seven questions
entailed by Reliability Centered Maintenance II Process and
Failure Mode & Effect Analysis Identification,
Conventional Preventive Maintenance Scheduling with
trade-off between reliability and utility scenarios, and
Maintenance Interval for Finding Failure. By using the
Conventional Preventive Maintenance, the scenario with
original MTTF results in 34.2 days of repair; the scenario
with utility + 20% results in 29.33 days of repair; the
scenario with utility + 40% results in 25.08 days of repair;
and the scenario with utility + 50% results in 23.91 days of
repair. With scenario original MTTF and utility + 20%,
Phonska I Plant cannot meet the production target. With
scenario utility + 40% and 50%, Phonska I Plant can meet
the production target. The Maintenance Interval for Finding
Failure Method is determined to get the early analysis of the
potential failure of a machine, so that the operator will get
the precaution and direct preventive tasks to reduce the
potential failure and get the plan for maintenance execution
according to preventive maintenance schedule.

Keywords : Proposed Maintenance Task, Reliability
Centered Maintenance II, Conventional Preventive
Maintenance Scheduling, Trade-off Reliability & Utility,
Maintenance Interval for Finding Failure
I. INTRODUCTION
owadays, the maintenance activity for machines and
equipment in manufacturing has been concerned to
support the companies in achieving their goals. In practice,
maintenance activity in a manufacturing company is not
easily done. It requires an effective planning and
management in order the maintenance activity can be
implemented well and effective. To maintain the availability
and the performance of the system, the effective
maintenance task is required as well [1].
Several companies, particularly the manufacturing
companies has been attempting to optimize the maintenance
activities in order to maintain their production activities.
This aims to fulfill the determined target production. One of
the manufacturing companies implementing the
maintenance activity with the purpose to meet the
determined production target is PT Petrokimia Gresik.
Over the years, PT Petrokimia Gresik has not been
executing the reliability calculation during the certain time
[R (t)] to all the machines and equipments in the plants. In
practice, reliability calculation should have been done by the
Engineering Inspection Department. Nevertheless, reliability
calculation in PT Petrokimia Gresik has still been the
planning. Therefore, it can be concluded that PT Petrokimia
Gresik has not been executing the reliability system
relatively to each plant. The absence of reliability
calculation in plant may cause the over-action and less-
action maintenance or inefficiency in [2].
One of many methods in maintenance task design is
Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) II. RCM II is a
process used to determine what to do in order each asset
may perform its function as its operational context. The
implementation of RCM II requires a big effort, which is the
analysis of the components, machines, and failure
identification must be executed by using the Failure Mode
Effect Analysis (FMEA) structurally to maintain the
performance of the system [3].
Based on current maintenance activity, PT Petrokima
Gresik needs an improvement of its maintenance system by
implementing RCM II to assist PT Petrokimia Gresik in
classifying the equipments and designing the maintenance
task of all the production unit in PT Petrokimia Gresik at
once. Besides, PT Petrokimia Gresik needs to conduct the
reliability calculation of each equipments, machines, and
components in order PT Petrokimia Gresik might have an
effective maintenance plan to assist PT Petrokimia Gresik in
fulfilling the production target. In this case, the author select
the Phonska I Plant of II A Department Production because
this plant has been operating since 2000, which means that
this plant has been operating for not too long time so that the
failure time since the first period is available.
In 2009, Phonska I Plant is stipulated as the official name
of the plant. The very first production capacity of Phonska I
is designed at 1000 tons / day or 300000 tons / year that has
been upgraded recently to be 450000 tons / year since 2007.
The increasing of Phonska I production capacity was
adjusted with its production target. The current capacity can
be fulfilled only if the plant operates during 24 hours with
annually turn around [4].
Design of Proposed Maintenance Task Based On the
Trade-Off Analysis between Reliability and Utility
(Case Study: Phonska I Plant Pt Petrokimia Gresik)
Sofyan Fahmi, Yudha Prasetyawan
Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Industrial Technology, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS)
Jl. Arief Rahman Hakim, Surabaya 60111
E-mail: yudhaprase@yahoo.com, sofyan.fahmi96@yahoo.com
N
JURNAL TEKNIK, (2013) 1-6

2
From the upgrading of production capacity of Phonska I,
PT Petrokimia Gresik ought to maintain the function of
every production unit and machine in the plant to avoid
downtime. By restarining the downtime, Phonska I may
increase the availabilty of machines in order the production
capacity can be upgraded. This downtime of system is most
affected by the major machine in the plant. The system fails
when one or more major machine stops performing its
function [5].
Based on the Annual Production Report of Production
Department 2A PT Petrokimia Gresik over 5 years from
2008 to 2012, the downtime of the Phonska I Plant is shown
by the graph below [6].



Figure 1 Scheduled & Unscheduled Downtime of Phonska I PT Petrokimia
Gresik 2008 2012
If the condition of the actual unexpected downtime is
higher than the targeted unexpected downtime in a constant
production rate per day, it will certainly decrease the
production of the plant. As a result, it will evoke the lost
production that will be the first reason of the profit loss.
Below is the graph that will describe and give the real
condition of the the actual and targeted production over five
years in the same years from 2008 to 2012:


Figure 2 Target & Actual Annual Production of Phonska I PT Petrokimia
Gresik 2008-2012
From the Figure 2, it can be seen that the actual
production of Phonska I PT Petrokimia Gresik was always
under the production target, except in 2009. The inability of
Phonska I Plant to meet the production target will cause the
loss or it is known as the lost sale cost or profit loss. If the
lost sale is converted into rupiah, the lost production should
be calculated by calculating the difference number of
targeted production and actual production.
Consequently, in this research, the author attempts to
develop or implement Reliability Centered Maintenance II,
which describes and determines the required maintenance
tasks and activities in order every equipment and physical
asset might maintain its operational function as expected.
For the success of RCM II implementation, the author
attempts to define the finction and functional failure of
system at first, then to define the mode and effects of its
failure which is commonly known as Failure Mode Effect
Analysis (FMEA). At the end, the author attempts to define
the effective maintenance tasks, preventive schedule of
major machine of Phonska I Plant, and its maintenance
interval in Phonska I PT Petrokimia Gresik. RCM II may
overcome the problem of incomplete information of
equipment, machines, and components classification in
Phonska I. In order to reach the effective and efficient RCM
II, especially in its maintennace interval, the reliability
calcualtion of the Phonska I production system and so the
mean life of each component will be unraveled as well. In
this research, the author will also combine the constraint of
production target which the determination will be analyzed
using the reliability calculation and otherwise. This
determination will be the trade-off between reliability and
the utility of the Phonska I plant. Through this reasearch, PT
Petrokimia Gresik will enable the implementation of RCM
II method to the whole plants to design the effective
maintenance task and meet the expected production target
and reliability through the maximum utility of the
equipments and machines at the plants.
II. RESEARCH ELABORATION
A. Literature Study
1) Reliability Centered Maintenance II
Reliability Centered Maintenance is the worldwide
leading maintenance identification method and other
maintenance activities, which is required to be implemented
into the physical assets in order the assets is able to sustain
the reliable performance. Reliability Centered Maintenance
(RCM) is a process used to determine what must be done in
order each physical asset is able to perform its function and
continue to its function as the owner expects in its present
operational context [3] [9].
Through the RCM application, each failure of
an asset can be observed and traced by the interrelated seven
questions entailed by the RCM Process:
- What are the functions and associated performance
standards of the asset in its present operating context?
- How or in what ways does it fail to fulfill its functions?
- What are the modes or the causes of each functional
failure?
- What will happen when each failure occurs?
- How or in what ways does each failure matter?
- What can be done to predict or prevent each failure?
- What should be done if a suitable proactive task cannot
be identified?
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
3
3

3
3

4
4

2
4

4
1

3
4
.
1
4

2
6
.
6
3

2
8
.
6
7

1
5
.
7
2

2
0
.
3
8

3
3

3
3

3
4

3
6

2
2

3
7
.
2
5

3
1
.
5
6

6
1
.
2
1

5
5
.
4
2

1
6
.
2
6

D
a
y
s

Year
Scheduled & Unscheduled DT of
Phonska I PT Petrokimia Gresik 2008 - 2012
Scheduled DT (Target) Scheduled DT (Actual)
Unscheduled DT (Target) Unscheduled DT (Actual)
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
4
2
9
0
0
0

4
3
0
0
0
0

4
2
5
9
1
4

4
5
3
0
0
0

4
5
0
0
0
0

4
1
5
6
3
9
.
3
9

4
8
7
2
4
6

3
3
4
6
0
1
.
4
4

3
5
3
4
2
3

4
2
3
5
0
7

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

(
T
o
n
s
)

Year
Targeted & Actual Production of Phonska I
PT Petrokimia Gresik 2008 - 2012
Production (Target) Production (Actual)
JURNAL TEKNIK, (2013) 1-6

3
By implementing RCM II, the information of a production
unit can be summarized in the seven questions entailed by
RCM Process. From that information, the evaluation of the
function and functional failure can be executed so the
Failure Modes & Effects Analysis can be composed as well
to design the proposed maintenance task [3].

2) Reliability Distribution (Failure Rate Model)
Reliability Mathematical model starts by defining the
reliability quantitatively in terms of probability (PDF) and
cumulative density function (CDF) for time-to-failure and
defining the failure rate and mean time to failure (MTTF).
According to Lewis (1994), Reliability is the probability that
the system survives for a specified period. The specified
time or period may be expressed in terms of random
variable x (time to failure) [5].
The time to failure of equipment is a random variable. In
advance of calculating the reliabilty of a machine or
equipment, the failure distribution of each equipment need
to be unraveled statistically. There are two type of failure
rate models, where each type of failure rate models
comprise various type of failure distributions.
The first failure rate model is Constant Failure Rate
Model. Constant Failure Rate Model is defined by the
assumption that the rate at which the system fails is
independent of its age. The constant failure rate
approximation is often quite adequate even though a system
or some of its components may exhibit moderate early
failures or aging effects. The only one failure distribustion
of the constant failure rate is the Exponential Distributions.
Meanwhile, the another model of failure rate is Time-
Dependent Failure Rate Model. The Time-Dependent
Failure Rate Model is used when there are variety of
situations in which the explicit treatment of early failurer or
aging effect, or both applied to the system. The time-
dependent falure rate model comprise the Normal
Distributions, the Lognormal Distributions, and the Weibull
Distributions [7].

3) Scheduling and Maintenance Interval
The calculation for obtaining the optimum maintenance
interval can be found by using many methods and many
formulas. The methods for calculating the maintenance
interval has been developed by many reserachers and
approximation. The maintenance interval used to apply the
maintenance activity for the equipments or assets depends
on the owner or companys maintenance management. The
maintenance interval can be calculated by using the
preventive maintenance scheduling and maintenance
interval for finding failure.
This maintenance scheduling method uses the data of
Mean Time To-Failure and data of the reparation activity or
Mean Time To-Repair of each components or machines.
The algorithms of this method are below:
1. Sorting the components based on the MTTF from the
lowest to the highest,
2. Creating the column under the title Start, Stop, and
Repair in a row, as many as the operational hours
divided by the lowest MTTF (stage),
3. Formulating the relevant equation (excel function) of
each column in each stage. In the stage 1, the
formulation for Stop column = Start + MTTF; the
value of the Start column is started from zero; the
value of the Repair column depends on the lowest
MTTF (when a component has reached its MTTF, then
the value of its MTTR should be appeared in the
column Repair and the other components are not
repaired). In the stage 2, the formula of the Start =
Stop (Stage 1) + Repair and the value of the Repair
is filled by the same way as the stage 1. Each column of
the stage 3 until the end of the stage is calculated with
the same way as before,
4. Checking the maintenance period for one year, and note
in which stage each component stops,
5. Adjusting the remaining MTTF by creating the
adjustment table below,
6. If any two or more components stop at the same time,
which means that the reparation should be applied to
those components, then the longest period of repair
among those components will be used to update the
Start column in the next stage,
7. The scheduling or staging will have to be discontinued
when all the components reach their MTTF at once at
the same time because the pattern of this staging will be
the identical to the first staging.
This method can be used to find the maintenance
scheduling or interval for series component or parallel
components. When the components are in the parallel
system, the algorithms above cannot be used. The
algorithms above are used to find the scheduling
maintenance for series components of a machine. To find
the scheduling for parallel components for many machines,
the algorithms number 3 to 7 are not applicable. If the
components are parallel and they are independent each
other, the reparation will be applied for each component
independently. By definition, when a component fails and
the reparation is applied, the other components do not need
to be stop. Consequently, the column of Repair will be
filled with the MTTR of each component [8].
Finding failure task is executed when the proactive task
cannot even be executed to reduce the multiple failure of the
related hidden failure up to the tolerated lower limit of
multiple failure. Finding failure task comprises the hidden
function checks to detect the failure of an equipment. This is
known as the functional check [3].
According to Mobray (1997), proposed interval
for finding failure task is calculated as below:
FFI = 2 U
tive
M
tive
Notes:
FFI : Failure Finding Interval
U
tive
: Desired Unavailability of protective device
M
tive
: MTBF of protective device

B. Methodology
The methodology or steps of conducting this research are
following this flowchart:
JURNAL TEKNIK, (2013) 1-6

4
Start
Problem Identification
Observation
Scoping: Limitations and Assumptions
Literature Review
Problem Formulation
Data Collection
Functional Block Diagram Identification
Function and Functional Failure
Identification of Phonska 1
FMEA Construction
Designing Proposed
Maintenance Task
Reliability Calculation
Utility Calculation and its
Trade-off with Reliability
Proposed Maintenance
Interval & Scheduling
Analysis and Data
Interpretation
Conclusion and
Recommendation
End
PMT Designing
Phase
Conclusion &
Recommendation
Phase
Identification
Phase
Preparation
Phase

Figure 3 Flowchart of Research
C. Reliability Centered Maintenance II Work Sheet
The Reliability Centered Maintenance II Worksheet that
has been made in this research is only for the identified 24
major or critical machines based on the downtime
information of the Phonska I Plant in 2012. This RCM II
Worksheet construction is based on the modified FMEA
analysis, which is included into the seven questions entailed
by the RCM II Process. From identified 24 major or critical
machines, some machines comprise the same components.
In this case, the similar causes of failure may happen to the
similar machine.
The RCM II Worksheet of each major machine only
contains the analysis of the major components. Some of
failures do not have the preventive task. It means that, when
this causes of failure happens, there is no other way but
shutting the unit down. This is done due to the preventive
task cannot be done to reduce the potential failure while the
unit is still operating. The shutdown action must be taken
because some factors such as the dangerous while replacing
the components. Cleaning or dismantling the equipment is
the only way to fix this problem and replacing the
components can be executed as well.
From the RCM II Worksheet for Phonska I Plant, it is
found that the potential failure in Phonska I Plant is caused
by operational problem and functional problem. The
functional problem consists of functional problem with
preventive task and without preventive tasks. So does with
the operational problem. All the problems that can cause the
downtime to the plant above can be recapped into a diagram.
The proportion of problems that can cause the downtime of
plant can be described by the diagram below:


Figure 4 Proportion of Problems Causing Downtime in Phonska I Plant

From the diagram above, it can be seen that the downtime
of Phonska I Plant is most caused by the functional problem,
but in reality, the operational problems comes up frequently
in the Phonska I Plant. Most of functional problems have the
preventive tasks that can be done to prevent or reduce the
potential failure of the related equipment. Most of
operational problems do not have the preventive tasks that
can be done to prevent or reduce the potential failure. The
operational problems without preventive tasks are the most
frequent problems that appear in the Phonska I Plant and
causing downtime to Plant. This may cause the downtime
because most of operational problems are encountered by
the important machines such as granulator, dryer, coater
drum and by material handling such as conveyor & elevator.

D. Machines Reliability
The reliability calculation of all the machines of Phonska
I Plant is started by failure fitting distribution of all the
identified TTF of each machine. The failure fitting
distribution of each machine is done by using the function of
Distribution Wizard in Weibull ++ 6 Software. The failure
caused by the operational problem is considered as the time
to failure. If all the failure distribution of the machines has
been revealed, the reliability of the machines from time to
time can be calculated by using the formula according to its
distribution. The reliability from time to time of all the
machines is calculated until 1500 hours because the highest
TTF of a machine is 1322 hours.
Most of machines that encountered failure frequently
during 2012 have a fast deterioration of reliability. The
reliability of the machines that is used as the standard for
maintenance is the reliability at time = MTTF. Most of
machines that encounter frequent failure during 2012 have a
lower MTTF and reliability at time = MTTF. The
48%
20%
12%
20%
Proportion of Problems Causing Downtime in
Phonska I Plant
Functional Problems with
Preventive Tasks
Functional Problems
without Preventive Tasks
Operational Problems with
Preventive Tasks
Operaional Problems
without Preventive Tasks
JURNAL TEKNIK, (2013) 1-6

5
degradation of reliability from time to time of these
machines is extremely fast as well. As example, the
reliability at time = MTTF = 199 hours of M109 is only
0.273, which is very low. This phenomenon may happen
because M109 is the most frequent machine that
encountered the failure during 2012. In the other side, the
reliability of Q102 is still 0.4999 at time = MTTF = 825
hours, which is still very high. This happens because during
2012, the Q102 rarely encountered the failure. The
reliability characteristic of each machine is most affected by
the frequency of failure of the machine itself during its
operational life or production. This reliability calculation
will be base for trade-off together with utility of the plant.

E. Maintenance Scheduling using Trade-Off
The maintenance scheduling of all the 24 major machines
of Phonska I Plant is made according to the Conventional
Preventive Maintenance Method. The maintenance by using
this method is done with four scenarios, they are original
utility trade-off, utility + 20%, + 40%, and + 50%. The
trade-off is stopped when there is one, more machines reach
the maximum TTF, or in other words, the reliability of the
machine is below 0.1, which is very low and the probability
of failure of this machine is very high.
The maintenance scheduling by using original MTTF
results in 34.2 days of repair and so the plant will stop
operating as long as 34.2 days if this maintenance-
scheduling scenario is implemented. The consequence of
using this scenario is the repair action is more frequent and
the target production cannot be reached. The production
target of the Phonska I Plant in 2013 is 415000 tons. With
the capacity 450000 per year, the capacity per day will be
1232.88 tons. By using this scenario maintenance, the
estimated production that can be reached is 407825.23 tons,
which is less than 415000 tons. By using the maintenance
scenario of utility +20%, the MTTF of the machines will
increase as well. The original utility is increased 20% first
and the result of this utility of each machine is then
conformed into the time to find the exact value of the MTTF
at utility +20%. With this scenario, the Phonska I Plant will
spend 29.33 days for repair days, which means that the
Phonska I Plant should stop operating as long as 29.33 days
to execute the maintenance. Apparently, the Phonska I Plant
is still unable to meet its production target with the
maintenance scenario of utility +20%. The estimated
production that can be reached by the Phonska I Plant by
using this scenario is 413835.52 tons, which is still less than
450000 tons. The original utility of all the machines is then
increased 40%. All the utility of machine that has been
increased 40% is then conformed to time to find the exact
MTTF value at utility + 40%. In this increasing of utility, no
machines have reached the reliability under 0.1 as well.
The maintenance scenario by using the utility + 40%
results in 25.08 days of repair, which means that the
Phonska I Plant should stop operating during 25.08 days to
execute this maintenance scenario. By using this
maintenance scenario, the estimated production that can be
reached is 419075.26 tons. This estimated production is
more than the production target. Therefore, this scenario is
recommended to execute in order Phonska I Plant may be
able to meet its production target. This utility trade-off is not
stopped yet. Because at utility 40%, the reliability of all the
machines is still above 0.1 and so the utility is increased
again to be + 50%.
The maintenance scenario by using utility + 50% results
in 23.9167 days of repair. The estimated production that can
be reached by using this scenario is 420513.62 tons, which
is more than the target production. At the utility + 50%, no
machines have reached the reliability under 0.1, which
indicates that this scenario is still possible to do although the
probability of failure is getting higher.
The maintenance scenario is not continued to the increasing
60% of utility, because at utility + 60%, some machines has
reached the reliability under 0.1 or excess the maximum
TTF that has ever been encountered over the years. That is
why; the maintenance-scheduling scenario by using this
preventive maintenance is not continued to utility 60%.
To know the comparison of machines reliability in each
maintenance scenario, the graphic in Figure 5 and 6 will
show this comparison. If the reliability of 24 machines is
recapped in one graphic, the graphic will be so crowded and
it is divided into two graphics, the reliability graphic of
material handling machines and processing machines



Figure 5 Reliability of Processing Machine in Each Utility Scenario



Figure 6 Reliability of Processing Machine in Each Utility Scenario
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

Utility
Reliability of Processing Machines
B101 Normal
C107 Normal
C108 Weibull 2
C109 Normal
M108 Normal
M109 Lognormal
M110 Normal
M117 Weibull 3
P103 Weibull 3
P107AB Normal
Q101AB Normal
Q102 Normal
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

Utility
Reliability of Material Handling Machines
M101 Normal
M106 Normal
M111 Weibull 3
M114 Normal
M118 Weibull 3
M120 Weibull 3
M403 Normal
M404 Normal
M107 Weibull 2
M112 Lognormal
M113 Normal
M116 Weibull 2
JURNAL TEKNIK, (2013) 1-6

6

From Figure 5 & 6, it can be seen that the reliability of
the machine at original utility has reached reliability above
0.5, which is very low. The time of each machine at the
utility scenario above is different. For example, the
reliability of M117 at original utility is 0.335 and the
reliability of M109 at its original utility is 0.273, but they
are in the different time and different utility. The graphic
above only describes the reliability of the machines at each
utility scenario.

F. Maintenance Interval for Finding Failure
The purpose of this Finding Failure Interval calculation is
to find the functional check in order to obtain the early
analysis for precaution of the potential failure. The early
analysis of potential failure may help the maintenance
execution becomes more effective. The interval between a
functional check with another is too short. This may
happens because the desired availability of the machines is
high and the MTTF and MTTR of each machine is relative
low.
For further analysis and coherent application of this
research, the procedures of maintenance by using the
integration of the scenario Maintenance Interval for Finding
Failure, RCM II Worksheet, and Preventive Maintenance
Scheduling are composed. Below are the brief procedures of
maintenance scenario in this research:
1. Checking the information of proactive tasks in RCM II
Worksheet is the first priority. The RCM II Worksheet
of the 24 major machines contains the information
about the function, failure function, failure modes,
consequences, and effect of failure, proactive task that
can be done to reduce the potential failure and the
corrective tasks if there is no proactive task.
2. Deciding the Preventive Maintenance Scenario is the
second step that has to be done in this procedure.
3. The Maintenance Interval for Finding Failure with the
result of functional check schedule will help the
maintenance executor to get the pre-analysis from the
symptom of the potential failure and so the precaution
of the failure can be prepared. If the operator finds the
operational or functional problem with the preventive
tasks, the operator should do the preventive tasks
according to the RCM II Worksheet. If the problem is
the operational or functional problem without the
preventive tasks, the operator should do corrective task.
4. The identified problems from the functional check will
be the consideration for Phonska I Plant to conduct the
maintenance activities at the schedules that has been
made by using the Preventive Maintenance Scheduling.
III. CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
The conclusions that can be summed based on the result
of this research to answer the purposes of this research are:
1. From the identified data downtime of Phonska I Plant PT
Petrokimia Gresik 2012 and also from the block diagram
of Phonska I Production Process, there are 24 major
machines. These major machines play the important role
in the Production Process of Phonska I Plant because when
these machines fail, the system will fails as well.
2. The function and the functional failure of 24 major
macines of Phonska I Plant has been identified by using
the modified Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)
and analysis of 7 questions entailed by RCM II Process in
the RCM II Worksheet.
3. The maintenance tasks of each major machines of Phonska
I PT Petrokimia Gresik has been made and included in the
RCM II Information Worksheet. From this RCM II
Information Worksheet, it can be identified that the
operational problems and the functional problems are the
causes of the potential failure. The proportion of this
problem causing the failure is: 12% is operational
problems with preventive tasks; 20% is operational
problems without preventive tasks; 20% is the functional
problems withot preventive tasks; and 48% is the
functional problems with preventive tasks.
4. The scenario of preventive maintenance scheduling based
on the trade-off between reliability and utility is continued
until the Phonska I Plant is able to fulfill its production
target and it is stopped when there is one or more
machines reach its maximum historical TTF or reach
reliability below 0.1, which means that the reliability of
these machines are too low and the probability of failure is
too high. Most of machines that encountered failure
frequently during 2012 have a fast degradation of
reliability.
5. The maintennace scheduling is composed based on the
Conventional Preventive Maintennace and the functional
check is made based on the Maintenance Interval for
Finding Failure. By using the original MTTF and utility +
20%, the estimated production does not meet the target.
By using the scenario utility + 40% and + 50%, the
estimated production meets the production target. Scenario
utility + 60% is not composed because some machines
reach reliability under 0.1 at this scenario.
The improvement and the potential research that can be
executed to be next research or to perfect this research is:
1. The next research may develop or improve this research to
find the optimal solution for scheduling. The next research
may complete this research with the optimal scenarios of
maintenance with the optimal cost and optimal human
resources. The next research may also develop the
simulation model for this maintenance scenario or develop
the program maintenance, which is packed in the effective
and coherent software interface.
REFERENCES
[1] Tsai, Y. T., Wang, K. S., & Tsai, L. C. (2004). A study of
availability-centered preventive maintenance for multi-component
sistems. Reliability Engineering and Sistem savety , 84, 261-262.
[2] Smith, A. M., & Hinchcliffe, G. R. (2004). RCM-Gateway to World
Class Maintenance (2 edition ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Inc.
[3] Mobray, J. (1997). Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) II (2nd
ed.). New York: Industrial Press.
[4] PT Petrokimia Gresik. (2012). PT Petrokimia Gresik. Retrieved
October 20, 2012, from Official Website of PT Petrokimia Gresik:
http://www.petrokimia-gresik.com/
[5] Lewis, E. E. (1994). Introduction to Reliability Engineering (Second
ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
[6] PT Petrokimia Gresik. (2008 -2012). Laporan Tahunan Produksi.
Gresik: PT Petrokimia Gresik.
[7] Dhillon, B. S., & Reiche, H. (1985). Reliability and Maintainability
Management. New York: Van Nonstrand Reinhold Company.
[8] Prasetyawan, Y. (2011). Penjadwalan Pemeliharaan Sederhana
Berdasarkan Prinsip Preventive Maintenance. Prosiding Seminar
Nasional Teknologi Industri XV. Surabaya: Fakultas Teknologi
Industri - ITS.
[9] Igba, J., Alemzadeh, K., Ebo, I. A., Gibbons, P., & Friis, J. (2013). A
Systems Approach towards Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM)
of Wind Turbines. Procedia Computer Science 16 , 814 823.