Time based vs Condition based Maintenance
Time based vs Condition based Maintenance
What criteria would you use to justify changing an equipment maintenance strategy from time-based to condition-based maintenance?
Re: Time based vs Condition based Maintenance
The strongest justification of moving from time based to condition based typically combines three major pillars:
Reliability evidence (historical failure data and degradation trends),
Risk reduction (improved safety, environmental protection, and production availability), and
Lifecycle cost optimization (lower total cost of ownership through fewer unnecessary interventions and reduced unplanned outages)
Reliability evidence (historical failure data and degradation trends),
Risk reduction (improved safety, environmental protection, and production availability), and
Lifecycle cost optimization (lower total cost of ownership through fewer unnecessary interventions and reduced unplanned outages)
Re: Time based vs Condition based Maintenance
Try to understand this with an example.
A centrifugal pump is currently overhauled every 12 months.
After reviewing five years of maintenance history:
80% of bearings show minimal wear at overhaul.
Vibration consistently increases 8–10 weeks before bearing failure.
Online vibration monitoring is available.
Bearing replacement requires a plant shutdown.
Annual overhauls introduce occasional maintenance-induced defects.
In this case, shifting to CBM is well justified because:
Degradation is measurable.
There is a sufficient P-F interval.
The pump is production-critical.
Scheduled maintenance is often unnecessary.
Monitoring technology and organisational capability are already in place.
So you just need to apply such criteria to understand where you optimize maintenance.
A centrifugal pump is currently overhauled every 12 months.
After reviewing five years of maintenance history:
80% of bearings show minimal wear at overhaul.
Vibration consistently increases 8–10 weeks before bearing failure.
Online vibration monitoring is available.
Bearing replacement requires a plant shutdown.
Annual overhauls introduce occasional maintenance-induced defects.
In this case, shifting to CBM is well justified because:
Degradation is measurable.
There is a sufficient P-F interval.
The pump is production-critical.
Scheduled maintenance is often unnecessary.
Monitoring technology and organisational capability are already in place.
So you just need to apply such criteria to understand where you optimize maintenance.
Re: Time based vs Condition based Maintenance
thanks novice123.
novice123 wrote: 29 Jul 2026, 14:49 Try to understand this with an example.
A centrifugal pump is currently overhauled every 12 months.
After reviewing five years of maintenance history:
80% of bearings show minimal wear at overhaul.
Vibration consistently increases 8–10 weeks before bearing failure.
Online vibration monitoring is available.
Bearing replacement requires a plant shutdown.
Annual overhauls introduce occasional maintenance-induced defects.
In this case, shifting to CBM is well justified because:
Degradation is measurable.
There is a sufficient P-F interval.
The pump is production-critical.
Scheduled maintenance is often unnecessary.
Monitoring technology and organisational capability are already in place.
So you just need to apply such criteria to understand where you optimize maintenance.