Data Quality Taxonomy & Failure Coding

Produced by: Supported by:

Brian Gilson CMRP Lead Reliability Project Manager

Ralph Hanneman CMRP Senior Consultant

Data Quality Taxonomy & Failure Coding

Structure at Owens Corning

Founded in 1938, an industry leader in glass fiber insulation,

roofing, asphalt, and glass fiber reinforcements

NYSE: OC

2011 sales: $5.3 billion

15,000 employees in 28 countries

FORTUNE 500 company for 58 consecutive years

Component of the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index

Three powerful businesses, three valuable franchises

Composites

Roofing

Insulation

Owens Corning - Who we are

• Global leader in APM software and services for asset-intensive

industries

• Lowers the risk of harm to people, our planet and profits

by predicting and preventing physical asset failures

• Headquartered in Roanoke, VA

• Offices in Houston, Dubai, Bangalore, Madrid, Singapore, Perth, and

Porto Alegre, Brazil

• www.meridium.com

Meridium - Who we are

• Owens Corning

o On a journey towards mature manufacturing reliability practices

o Implementing ECC 6.0 EP4 in North America

o Realized Failure Coding in SAP is vital for data driven decisions

• No one right way to develop failure coding

Find what works best for your company!

Our intent is to share our story to help others towards

increased reliability of their assets & processes

Introduction

• Multiple versions of SAP

• No standard work management process

• No asset classification data being used

• One size fits all failure coding not working well

• Taxonomy classification virtually non-existent

Standardization needed to occur

Processes needed to change

Where we were…

Makeover Opportunity

• Migration from R/3 3.1i and 4.7 to ECC 6.0

• SAP Plant Maintenance Enterprise Solutions o Owned by Owens Corning MRG (Manufacturing Reliability Group)

• Objectives: o Enterprise wide solutions

o Continuous Improvement (CI)

o Data quality and user friendliness

o Change management practices and training

o Cost effective

• Thoughts to Action

o Discovery process to develop strategy and roadmap

o Selected Meridium - failure coding

o Developed catalog profile numbering convention

o Master Library Concept

o Meridium SAP enhancement code

• Initial Coding Kickoff Workshop – Oct 2011

o Meridium and OC’s MRG team

o Utilized Meridium and industry best practices

o Modeled after ISO 14224-2006 Standard

o Brainstormed taxonomy design for RWP & SAP

The journey

• “General” Assets and Codes Identified

o Core team – site representatives from all businesses

o Kickoff workshop set process

o Asset list identified and assigned catalog profile codes

o Developed failure coding

• “Specific” Assets and Codes Being Developed

o Team formed from single business

o Kickoff workshop - same process as core team

o Assets specific to business identified - assigned catalog profiles

o Sanctions additional “General” assets & codes

The journey (cont)

• A common problem

• No methodology to simplify and segregate codes for specific asset class and types

• Matching Damage codes to the Object Part codes error potential

Failure Coding Mismatches

• Catalog Profile

o Unique numbering convention of assets

• The Master Library Concept

o Object parts (maintainable items) specific to the asset

o Damage code set specific to object part (maintainable items)

• SAP Enhancement

o Automatic matching of Object Part code and Damage code group

Failure Coding Mismatch Solution

• Numerical Design

• Enables:

o Master Library concept

o Asset classification and Meridium’s best practice

o Use of single field

o Easily searchable

Catalog Profile Code

Brainstormed during

initial workshop.

Developed by

Meridium on top of

the Master Library

Concept

Master Library & SAP Customization

• Assures data quality

• Increases craft efficiency

• Optimizes code selection

• Reduces craft input errors

• Standardizes analysis, reporting and metrics

Benefits

• Change management processes and training

• Staying evergreen

• SAP implementation schedule

• Adapting to inconsistency of master data

Challenges

• MRG ownership

• Investment in the resources

• Meridium’s training and facilitation

• Meridium’s proprietary failure coding tool & database

• Brian Gilson and Ralph Hanneman

Enablers

• Positive feedback

• User adoption

• Committed people

• Code mismatch errors eliminated

• MRG Team responsible for MOC process

• “Specific” asset code development

• Ongoing monthly transports

Seeing results

Moving Forward

Code Set

Quantity of Codes developed through

Jan 2013

Detection Method 6

Functional Failure 19

Catalog Profiles (Asset Types)

87

Unique Object Parts 139

Total Object Parts Assigned to Assets

4127

Unique Damages 35

Total Damages Assigned to Object Parts

1394

Functional Loss 4

Maintenance Activity 18

Cause Codes 19

Code Groups 236

• Invest in teams to obtain user adoption and maximize

brainstorming of ideas and codes

• Standardized asset classification for category, class & type

(catalog profile)

• Utilization of master library concept reduces code selection errors

and optimizes craft activity reporting time

• Use the methodology and processes to develop profile and failure

coding as your company requires

o Leverage existing standards – Don’t reinvent the wheel

o Do what’s best for your company

Key Lessons & Takeaways

Q&A

• Mapping table showing ISO terms to SAP terms with technical information

Appendix 1- Mapping Table

ISO 14224 Term SAP Term Data Entry Method / Options Technical

Malfunction Breakdown Indicator Checkbox Field name: MSAUS

Detection Method Not in Standard SAP Subject / Coding Field Option: Use Catalog: D - Coding

Failure Mode (Functional Failure) Not in Standard SAP Subject / Coding Field Option: Use Catalog: D - Coding

Effect Effects on Operating Function Selection List Field name: AUSWK T-code OIMW

Functional Loss (Notification) System Condition Selection List Field name: ANLZN T-code OIMZ

Maintainable Item Object Part Catalog Code Catalog B: Object Parts

Condition Damage Catalog Code Catalog C: Overview of Damages

Failure Cause Cause Code Catalog Code Catalog 5: Causes

Activity Activity Catalog Code Catalog A: Activities

Task Task Catalog Code Catalog 2: Tasks

• The Master Library Concept

• Guidelines

o Each code used, has a prefix that matched the catalog it is used in

All Maintainable Items begin with Bxxx, because the Maintainable Items in

SAP are found in Catalog B.

o Each code is used to uniquely describe the part, condition, cause, etc.

There is only one code for Bearing, not a scattering of codes that mean

bearing.

o The code group for damages is the same as the maintainable item code

that the damages are documenting.

Bearing is B001 – the code group for Damages for a Bearing is “B001”.

The actual Damage codes in code group have the prefix C.

▫ E.g. C008 – Corroded, C023 – Seized, etc.

This way a technician can more easily select the damage codes based on the

maintainable item that experienced the failure

Appendix 2- Master Library Concept

• Useful whitepapers on the topic of failure coding in SAP

o Meridium Basics Failure Event Coding

o https://www.meridium.com/knowledgecenter/members/apmadvisor/basic_failure_

event_coding.asp

o Eight Steps to Boost User Adoption of Failure Event Codes

o http://www.apmadvisor.com/archivearticle.asp?id=129&is=23&ord=2

o How to Easily Use SAP Notifications to Document Crucial Failure Related

Information

http://www.apmadvisor.com/archivearticle.asp?id=223&is=43&ord=2

Appendix 3- Whitepapers

Produced by: Supported by:

Brian Gilson, CMRP Lead Reliability Project Manager

Owens Corning Sales, LLC

brian.gilson@owenscorning.com

Ralph Hanneman, CMRP Sr. Consultant

Meridium, Inc.

rhanneman@meridium.com