Run-to-failure (RTF) maintenance

What is run-to-failure maintenance?

Run-to-failure (RTF) maintenance, also known as corrective maintenance or breakdown maintenance, is a maintenance strategy where equipment and machinery are deliberately allowed to operate until they fail. During this time no preventive maintenance is performed on the equipment, and repairs or replacements are only made after a breakdown occurs.

What are the advantages of run-to-failure maintenance?

Run-to-failure (RTF) maintenance can have several advantages in specific contexts:

• Lower upfront costs: RTF maintenance usually incurs lower upfront costs compared to preventive maintenance as no action is taken until a failure occurs.
• Simplicity: It's a straightforward strategy to implement, as no planning or scheduling of maintenance activities is necessary until equipment fails.
• Full utilization: Equipment is used to its maximum, potentially extending its useful life beyond what might be achieved with other maintenance strategies.
• No over-maintenance: With RTF, there's no risk of over-maintaining equipment, which can occur in preventive maintenance if the maintenance is performed more frequently than needed.

When should a run-to-failure maintenance program be used?

A run-to-failure (RTF) maintenance program should be used cautiously and only under certain conditions. It's typically best suited to the following situations:

• Non-critical equipment: RTF is most appropriate for non-critical equipment or systems that do not directly impact the operation's productivity, safety, or bottom line. If these components fail, they should not cause any significant downtime or disruption to operations.
• Low cost of failure: RTF can be a good approach when the cost of failure (including repair or replacement costs and any costs associated with downtime) is less than what preventive maintenance would cost.
• Equipment with a random failure pattern: If the equipment's failure patterns are completely random and not age-related, then preventive maintenance may not be effective, making RTF a more suitable strategy.
• Low safety risk: Equipment that, if failed, does not create a significant safety hazard, can be considered for an RTF approach.
• Non-repairable items: Certain items, like light bulbs, typically run to failure because it's not practical to repair them.

It's important to conduct a risk assessment before choosing an RTF maintenance strategy to ensure that any potential impacts of equipment failure, such as impacts on safety, productivity, and costs, are thoroughly understood and acceptable.

Example of run-to-failure

Here's a practical example of run-to-failure maintenance in a manufacturing environment:

Let's say you run a factory that produces cardboard boxes. One of the pieces of equipment in your factory is a stapling machine, which staples the corners of boxes to secure them during the folding process. This stapler is a robust piece of equipment, but it's also inexpensive and easy to replace and not critical to the operation of the rest of the factory.

Instead of inspecting this stapling machine on a regular basis or trying to predict when it might fail, you adopt a run-to-failure approach. This means that the machine is used continuously during operation hours without any preventative maintenance. When the stapler eventually fails—it jams up, parts wear out, etc.—production continues with the other machines while the broken machine is either repaired or replaced.

This approach saves your maintenance team time because they don't need to inspect or perform preventive maintenance on the stapling machine. It's more cost-effective to simply run the machine to failure and deal with problems when they arise, given the easy availability of replacements and the non-critical role of the machine in the overall production process.

How to effectively implement and monitor run-to-failure maintenance

Run-to-failure maintenance may be implemented and monitored using many maintenance methods. If an entire facility works on a run-to-failure strategy, then CMMS and EAM systems will provide much more functionality than required.

For facilities where run-to-failure is used for some assets and more complex strategies, the CMMS and EAM will allow these different types of maintenance strategies to happen simultaneously. A CMMS can also be useful for tracking the number of times the asset has been repaired or replaced and associated costs. A good run-to-failure maintenance strategy will require a management tool because of the large number of spare parts that may be needed for breakdowns.