You already know which equipment keeps you up at night.
We are maintenance and reliability engineers who have worked inside operating plants, so we know how it usually starts. The asset register drifts. The maintenance plans stop matching the equipment they were written for. Spares get bought on instinct because nobody can prove what the machine actually needs. None of it looks urgent until something stops.
We fix what sits underneath: the asset data, the maintenance strategy, and the system that ties them together. We work to RAGAGEP, recognised and generally accepted good engineering practice, so what we hand over stands up to an audit as well as to a Monday morning.
Asset data maturity, and why it gates everything else
Every reliability technique worth running depends on the quality of the register underneath it. This is the ladder we move clients up, one rung at a time.
Ad hoc
Records created on demand with no standard. Duplicate functional locations, blank criticality, BOMs that do not match the plant.
Defined
A naming convention and equipment taxonomy are agreed and written down. ISO 14224 classes and boundary definitions applied to the register.
Governed
Rules are enforced at the point of creation. SAP Master Data Governance workflow, named data owners, validated interfaces.
Measured
Data quality is tracked as a KPI. Exceptions are worked like defects rather than discovered during an audit.
Predictive
Failure history is clean and coded well enough to carry Weibull analysis, RAM modelling and asset performance management.
Most plants we are called into sit between the first and second rung. The work is not glamorous, but nothing above it is possible until the register underneath is right.
English (United States)