THE ST. LOUIS PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

Similar documents
METRO. Monthly Board Report. February 2009

CASE STUDY. Compressed Air Control System. Industry. Application. Background. Challenge. Results. Automotive Assembly

Customer Service and Operations Committee. Board Action Item III-A. February 12, 2015

APPENDIX C. Systems Performance Report C-1

Report Date: May 9,2012 Contact: Dan Hilton Contact No.: RTS No.: 9584 VanRIMS No.: Meeting Date: June 12, 2012

City of Davenport CitiBus Public Transportation Study. April 2015

BELFAST RAPID TRANSIT. Ciarán de Búrca Director, Transport Projects Division Department for Regional Development

Urban Street Design and Development

Strategies. How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Enforcement 6-1

Priced Managed Lanes in America. October 2013

Selecting Maintenance Tactics Section 4

CITY OF VANCOUVER ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

Reserve Analysis for < hoa name> HOA

Metro. This report updates the board on specific strategies under consideration for implementation by FY2006 to reduce bus accidents.

DIRECTION REGARDING WEHO PEDALS BIKE SHARE PROGRAM AND DOCKLESS BIKE SHARE PILOT MAYOR PRO TEMPORE JOHN D' AMICO COUNCILMEMBER LAUREN MEISTER

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND RADM WILLIAM A. MOFFEIT BUILDING BUSE ROAD, BLDG 2272 PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND,

Public Transport Asset Management

Operational Comparison of Transit Signal Priority Strategies

Chapter 5. Complete Streets and Walkable Communities.

Prince George s County Council Retreat January 5, 2017

MEMBERSHIP GUIDE RULES & REGULATIONS. A Lennar Community. Lakewood National Golf Club House and Ground Rules

Service Business Plan

Managed Lanes: A National Perspective Managed Lane Strategies

Bus Riders of Saskatoon Meeting with City of Saskatoon Utility Services Department October 23, :30pm 2:30pm th Street West, Saskatoon

Instances of 1 Minute or Less Between Buses 4 5% 55% 3.9% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 2.9% 2.8% Sep- Sep 07 Oct-07 Nov-07 Dec-07 Jan- Jan 08 Feb- Feb 08 Mar-08

Performance Measures Year End 2015

SUMPs - a new planning paradigm for sustainable urban mobility - how to bring it

A CHANGING CITY. of Edmonton, it is essential that it reflects the long-term vision of the City.

Incorporating Sidewalks into Transportation Asset Management. Presentation by Alan S. Kercher, P.E. Kercher Engineering, Inc.

The Path to LUBRICATION EXCELLENCE

THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE CHALLENGING. Don Hill President, COO

San Francisco s Capital Plan & the Mayor s Transportation Task Force 2030: Funding the next steps for transportation

Organization for Traffic Control on County Highways

New Measure A Expenditure Categories DEFINITIONS OF ELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES Adopted March 8, 2007

Business Plan Presentation

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN

About the Active Transportation Alliance

Scheduling 101 Calculating Running Time Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority Multimodal Operations Workshop Houston, TX

GOLD COAST TRANSIT DISTRICT SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FY 2015 FY 2019 APPENDICES

Development and Evolution of an Asset Management Organization

Bus Rapid Transit: How Delhi Compares

FY2006 Budget Board Budget Committee request for information. Board Request: Detailed information on bus route 5A DC-Dulless Airport

Integrated Corridor Approach to Urban Transport. O.P. Agarwal World Bank Presentation at CODATU XV Addis Ababa, 25 th October 2012

ABC Activities / External Products by Account Types ($ in 000's) FIELD SERVICES FEBRUARY, 2004

The Toll Industry of the Future: Looking Ahead to 2030

Market Update. Randy Tinseth Vice President, Marketing Boeing Commercial Airplanes. Copyright 2016 Boeing. All rights reserved.

SIDEWALK INSPECTION AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations APPENDIX C TRANSIT STATION ACCESS PLANNING TOOL INSTRUCTIONS

Our Approach to Managing Level Crossing Safety Our Policy

Keeping your critical equipment up and running. What the LifeSense system can do for you. LifeSense technology: monitors in real time

Pavement Management Report. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2013

TAC February 1, 2012 Prepared by Metro Bike Program

STAFF REPORT ACTION REQUIRED

Green mobility and traffic safety in Copenhagen

Craig Rempp, Transit Superintendent Mary Karlsson, Kimley-Horn. Mankato City Council Meeting 6/25/2018

REPORT. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the report on Pilot Results Free Transit for Seniors, dated October 25, 2012, from Oakville Transit be received.

Comprehensive Measures to Reduce Traffic Accident Fatalities

Incentive Regulation in the German Energy sector from concept to implementation

Arlington County 10-Year Transit Development Plan & Premium Transit Network Briefing. May 2016

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION REPORT NO.

NYC Pedestrian Safety Study & Action Plan. NYTMC Brown Bag Lunch Presentation December 15, 2010

CBTL Job Postings. The Track Manager will be responsible for evening and weekend work on a flexible and changing schedule.

Proposed. City of Grand Junction Complete Streets Policy. Exhibit 10

Freewheelers (7-8) Mechanics (7-8) Food Cart. Seekers (7-8) Food Cart. Cruisers (5-6) Food Cart. Seekers (7-8) Girls Mechanics (7-8) Food Cart

Multi-Modal Transportation Programs

Section 9. Implementation

Welcome. If you have any questions or comments on the project, please contact:

Pavement and Asset Management from a City s Perspective Mike Rief, PE, DBIA and Andrea Azary, EIT. February 12, 2015

BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MERCER ISLAND, WA

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

Managed Lanes: A Popular and Effective Urban Solution. Ed Regan Presented by Susan Buse

SALT LAKE CITY GOLF DIVISION 2014 SEASONAL JOB DESCRIPTIONS AND PAY SCALE

Reliability. Sistem Perawatan TIP FTP UB 1 -

CO2 Compressor Operation Equipment Function and Layout

Safe Road Design Practiced by KEC

The City of Toronto s Long-Term Financial Direction

OPERATING DEPARTMENT BUDGETS

Pocatello Regional Transit Master Transit Plan Draft Recommendations

Regional Alternatives Analysis. Downtown Corridor Tier 2 Evaluation

GOLF OPERATIONS MANAGER NF

Is St. Louis Ready for a Bike Share System? May 14, 2014 Public Open House

Attachment A: Columbus Area Metropolitan Transportation Plan Objectives, Performance Measures, and Targets

Governor s Transportation Vision Panel

City of Toronto Complete Streets Guidelines

Understanding Rail and Bus Ridership

Autonomous Vehicles & V2X

ST. JOHNS GOLF CLUB PHASE II FINDINGS, PHASE III RECOMMENDATION, AND POTENTIAL PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY

Public Bikesharing in North America: Early Operator and User Understanding

Congestion Evaluation Best Practices

City of Long Beach Office of the City Auditor. Harbor Security Division Dive Team Overtime Review. Laura L. Doud, CPA City Auditor.

Congestion Management in Singapore. Assoc Prof Anthony TH CHIN Department of Economics National University of Singapore

TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT

New Strategic Road Safety Plan Risk assessment as alternative for (lack of) accident data?

Looking Ahead and Looking Back: An Examination of NJDOT s and NJT s 2014 Capital Program

Thermoplastic Road Marking Applicator

EUROPEAN MOBILITY WEEK September 2015

COST ESTIMATION. Fully Allocated Causal Factor Models Temporal Variation Models Incremental Fixed Variable Cost Models

Interstate 66 Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement. Cooperating and Participating Agencies Meeting March 19, 2012

Safety Division Monthly Key Performance Indicators for the Reporting Period of January 2013

NIBD Standards. a. All centers must be members of Bowling Proprietors Association of America BPAA).

Transcription:

THE ST. LOUIS PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM Program Results & Application in Your Organization Ray Friem, Chief Operating Officer Metro Transit

STRATEGIC FLEET MAINTENANCE Strategic Vehicle Procurement Predictive Maintenance Program Lower Maintenance Costs & Greater Reliability

PRE-PROGRAM BUS MAINTENANCE COST PER MILE $2.00 $1.80 $1.60 $1.40 $1.20 $1.00 $0.80 $0.60 $0.40 $0.20 $0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Original Cost/ Mile

HISTORICAL BUS REPLACEMENT STRATEGY 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Number of Buses Purchased Based On Funding (earmarks) 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Number of Buses

PROCUREMENT STRATEGY DRIVES OPERATING COST U n i t s P u r c h a s e d 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 $35,000,000.00 $30,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00 $20,000,000.00 $15,000,000.00 $10,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $0.00 A n n u a l O p e r a t i n g C o s t Fiscal Year Units Purchased Annual Maintenance Cost

TRADITIONAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM HISTORICALLY 1500 MILE PACE 1500, 3000, 4500, 6000, 7500, 9000, 10,500, 12,000 repeat Driven by the need to adjust brakes every 1500 miles 3000 MILE PACE 3000, 6000, 9000, 12,000 repeat Changed with the advent of automatic slack adjusters but synced with the need to change Oil at 6000, ATF at 12,000 and Diff lube at 24,0000 miles

TRADITIONAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM Components changed as needed Bus to main rebuild center for major engine repair or replacement and body repairs (usually mid-life) Dwell time on major repairs of 100 days or more Low expectations

IN 2002 IT WAS CLEAR THAT WE ABSOLUTELY HAD TO BREAK THIS CYCLE IF THE TRANSIT SYSTEM WOULD BE SUCCESSFUL System had just completed the purchase of 260 new buses in the past two years for a bus fleet that was 415 buses (now 380 plus contingency). That meant that we had about 5 years before major work and cost for midlife activities would commence. Further, our work load was immediately lessened by the new buses, in other words, we had time, but time works both for you and against you. It was imperative that we do everything we could to break the cycle.

REDESIGNED BUS & VAN FLEET MAINTENANCE IN 2002 CMO MANDATE Design a Program that could: Control operating cost Manage life cycle cost Extend the life of a bus beyond 12 years / 500,000 miles. Required to stagger future procurement efforts. If necessary retire some buses early on mileage only to further stretch procurement cycle.

PROGRAM GOALS Budgeting should be consistent and predictable Plan our work so that both operating and capital costs are consistent from year to year This is a go-long strategy that may require more than one capital purchase cycle to complete

PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE Basic Concept: Replace or overhaul parts before they fail in service Ensure your preventative maintenance is part of your fleet management strategy Rigidly enforce configuration management No sub-fleets within sub-fleets Measure, adjust, and measure again Perform replacement at regular intervals

MANAGE AND PROGRAM LIFE CYCLE AND COST Determine expected life for asset Bus 15 years and 800,000 miles Create a maintenance program in order to attain the expected life Condition based maintenance point every 50,000 miles PM inspection schedule at 10,000 miles Oil change only (Jiffy Lube) at 6,000 miles

PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE PLAN Minor actions every 50,000 miles 50k, 150k, 250k, 350k, 450k, 550k Major actions every 100,000 miles 100k, 200k, 300k, 400k, 500k, 600k

PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE PLAN

BASE VS. PROGRAM BUS MAINTENANCE COST PER MILE $2.00 $1.80 $1.60 $1.40 $1.20 $1.00 $0.80 $0.60 $0.40 $0.20 $0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Traditional Cost Per Mile Predictive Cost Per Mile

HOW EXACTLY DOES OUR PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM SAVE US MONEY? We looked at when historical failures occurred and found: We would bring a bus in four times to replace four identical components as they failed individually. (Changing them all at once saved three trips into the shop). We were running components into the ground, for example transmissions: Complete Overhaul of failed unit costs between $10K and $16K depending on model. Providing overhaul of seals and bearings before failure costs $4K. By determining which components historically failed and scheduling them for replacement in the 50K mile increment before failure we could predict when we needed the part (Inventory reduction / Cost of $$$)

HOW EXACTLY DOES OUR PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM SAVE US MONEY? Every failure that occurred happened with people on the bus! Reduce in route failures, save on in route replacements (less angry customers = more customer revenue). Reduction in Accidents: Zero claims of Brake Failure in Five Years Enhanced Schedule Performance Helped Improve adherence to bus schedules from 75% to 93%. Needed the Capital Component (Rational Replacement Strategy) to Assure Success..

BUS FLEET REPLACEMENT STRATEGIES Units Purchased $40,000,000 160 $35,000,000 Purchase As Funded Strategy Transitional Purchase Strategy Planned Purchase 140 Strategy $30,000,000 120 $25,000,000 100 $20,000,000 80 $15,000,000 60 $10,000,000 40 $5,000,000 20 $0 Annual Maintenance Cost 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Number of Buses Cost 0

PRE-PROGRAM EXPENSE ($) VS. VEHICLE USAGE (MILES) $120,000 120000 $100,000 100000 $80,000 80000 $60,000 60000 $40,000 40000 $20,000 20000 $0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Old Annual Cost Old Annual Mileage 0

PREDICTIVE PLAN EXPENSE ($) VS. USAGE (MILES) 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Predictive Annual Mileage Predictive Annual Cost

BUS LIFE-CYCLE UTILIZATION 800000 700000 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Old Cumulative Miles Predictive Cumulative Mileage

DIRECT PROGRAM BENEFITS: GREATER VEHICLE RELIABILITY 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 AVG AGE MDBF

DIRECT PROGRAM BENEFITS: REDUCTION IN STOREROOM INVENTORY REQUIREMENT $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 250 200 150 100 50 0 Storeroom Value Complaints

INFLUENCES OTHER SYSTEM OUTCOMES Accident Rates Workers Comp Claims 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 FY02FY03FY04FY05FY06FY07FY08FY09FY10FY11FY12FY13FY14 Year Measured 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 FY02FY03FY04FY05FY06FY07FY08FY09FY10FY11FY12FY13FY14 Call-A-Ride (Preventable) MetroBus (Total) Call-A-Ride MetroBus MetroLink On Time Performance Complaint / 100,000 Boardings 105.00% 100.00% 60 50 95.00% 40 90.00% 30 85.00% 20 80.00% 10 75.00% FY02FY03FY04FY05FY06FY07FY08FY09FY10FY11FY12FY13FY14 0 FY02FY03FY04FY05FY06FY07FY08FY09FY10FY11FY12FY13FY14 Call-A-Ride MetroLink MetroBus Call-A-Ride MetroLink Metrobus

INDICATORS OF INEFFICIENT MAINTENANCE PRACTICES Campaigns or Systems Approach The practice of moving through fleet to repair or install a single component Expensive and a configuration nightmare! Competitive or Cooperative Competition between locations fosters secrecy Objective or Subjective Do personnel appraisal programs include objective measures both on individual (cost center), modal (division) and system levels?