Getting in front of the problem

With only limited resources, many managers may be tempted to adopt the "run it ’til it breaks" method of addressing maintenance issues. A school or university using this maintenance method saves money in the short term because as long as equipment and systems are functioning, the institution isn’t spending funds on maintenance.

The "Guidelines for Maintenance of Public School Facilities in Maryland," prepared by the Interagency Committee on School Construction, explains the penny-wise-pound-foolish nature of this reactive approach.

"In reality, during this time we are really obligating ourselves to greater expense than under a different maintenance approach, because we are shortening the life of the equipment, resulting in the eventual need for more frequent, more intensive, and more costly replacement," the guide says. "The labor cost associated with this repair will likely be higher than normal because the failure will require more extensive repairs than if the equipment had not been run to failure. If critical equipment fails during off hours or close to the end of a normal work day and needs to be put back on line immediately, emergency overtime expenditures will be required."

In a worst-case scenario, a maintenance breakdown could shut down a facility, and force students and staff to relocate while repairs are pursued.

More preferable ways of addressing maintenance needs are preventive and predictive approaches.

The Maryland guide defines preventive maintenance as "actions performed on a regular schedule to detect, prevent, or mitigate deterioration of a component or system in order to sustain or extend its useful life by reducing wear to an acceptable level," such as lubrication of parts, filter changes in mechanical equipment, or visual inspections of roofs and drains.

"By performing preventive maintenance as the equipment designer envisioned, the life of the equipment will approach or exceed the designed life expectancy, barring any unforeseen events," the guide says. "While all catastrophic equipment failures cannot be entirely eliminated, the number of failures will decrease. Extending the useful life of equipment and minimizing equipment failures both translate into maintenance and capital cost savings."

Using preventive maintenance strategies instead of reactive ones can generate savings of 12 to 18 percent, the guide says.

A predictive maintenance approach is considered superior to reactive or preventive strategies. Predictive maintenance, the Maryland guide says, is "a process of investigation and measurement to detect the onset of equipment or system degradation, thereby allowing stressors to be eliminated or controlled before they cause significant deterioration in the physical state of the components."

With predictive maintenance, the need for maintenance is determined by the actual condition of the equipment or system rather than by a pre-set schedule.

"A well orchestrated predictive maintenance program will all but eliminate catastrophic equipment failures," the guide says. "Maintenance activities can be scheduled to minimize or completely avoid overtime costs, to minimize inventory and parts orders to only those that are required, and to support future maintenance needs well in advance. The operation of the equipment can be optimized, saving energy costs and increasing plant reliability."

The downside of a predictive maintenance program is the startup cost.

"Much of the investigative equipment that is needed requires an initial cost in excess of $50,000," the guide says. "Since personnel must exercise greater judgment and discretion than in a preventive maintenance program, training of in-plant personnel to effectively utilize predictive maintenance technologies will require considerable funding. Program success will require an understanding of the principles of predictive maintenance and a firm commitment to make the program work."