Equipment Identification Systems


Thread Starter

gerald beaudoin

We are going to be numbering all of our equipment in the plant in order to implement a computer aided maintenance system. We have already tried a couple of approaches to this: numbering by line designation, numbering by physical zone location, but each system seems to reveal problems after being used for some time. Usually this occurs when the zone delimitations are changed (walls being moved, etc.) or when equipment is moved to a new location. I would welcome any thoughts on this issue or any recommended reading in order to re-plan this task for the LAST time. Thanks Gerald Beaudoin Leahy Ochards Inc.

Ralphsnyder, Grayg

If they are going to be moved around then assign an equipment type and sequence within that type. In a way it is like assigning a permanent serial number to each piece of equipment. 1100-01 conveyor #1 1100-02 conveyor #2 2100-01 tank #1 2100-02 tank #2 Grayg Ralphsnyder

Bouchard, James [CPCCA]

We faced the same problem and went for a system where the machine number was assigned sequentially as the machines were added and bears no relation to the location, department etc. Your maintenance system then has to take into consideration the grouping you want by itself instead of using the machine number. We also use the machine number for the drawings of the machine ( but that poses other problems if you have several identical machines ) There is no nice clean solution that is good for all time. James Bouchard

Michael Tucker

hey, I have not tried this , but i have weighed its pro's and con's , it seems to me for practical purposes that you might consider alphabatizing by vendor or manufacturer name followed by a grid type location plan that will not change due to wall locations or other such variables. This could also include outdoor equiptment as the grid would cover the entire property......this would also keep additions to the current building plan from causing problems in the future.Also maintanance would be easier due to the use of manufacturers names and model # as titles. example: manufacturer model location allen bradley 1749-eyt r9 allen bradley 1755-udh a12.....and so on the "letters" reprisent rows the "numbers" reprisent collums maybe even use row or collum letters and numbers on the walls at eye level or at the base for quick reference. e-mail me with questions or critsizm...thanx............MIKE
Without knowing exactly how your systems are laid out this may not be applicable but this is our plant identification scheme: All equipment is IDed in the X### format. The letter designation is for the unit operation it is related to, followed by a three-digit number. 000 series for pumps 100 series for vessels 200 series for heat exchangers 300 series for vacuum equipment 400 series for agitators 500 series user defined (for the oddball stuff) 600 series 110/220 VAC instrumentation 700 series for analog instrumentation 800 series continuation of 700 series 900 series Future This makes maintenance nice since you can store your files by unit operation, and your pump mechanic can simply pull all the 000 series work orders for the unit operation that is available for PM. The only problem we run into is when the service is changed for a piece of equipment. Then all the files and drawing need to be updated with the new ID #, but this only occurs with major system changes. Hope this helps.

Bob Peterson

I suggest using a serial numbering scheme starting with 1. No other system actually works in the long run. This way you can have a cross reference data base that tells you what system/machine #1 is and it can change as the plant changes, without having to renumber your machines as they move, or worse yet get modified. Bob Peterson

Anthony Kerstens

I've often used the approach of Plant#-Area#-Line#-EquipmentID-ComponentID for the purposes of HMI development and alarm group structure. Yours seems to be a similar task, but I have also found problems in the past because of things like portable equipment and moved equipment. The solution? Assign a number and provide the flexibility to make changes down the road. You are also likely going to need room within the scheme for additions/expansion, similar to providing spare I/O points in a panel and not packing things tight like sardines in a can. At each segment and sub-segment in your breakdown, for example, you could provide room for 25-30% future entries. Anthony Kerstens P.Eng.
I think James Bouchard has hit the nail on the head. To elaborate on his suggestion I would use bar-coding. Then using a bar-code scanner and a simple VB app you could associate the bar - code to data entered into an Access Data Base. Any changes could be done in the database and there would be no limit to the data associated with the asset. Good Luck

Michael Griffin

At 12:07 27/02/01 -0500, gerald beaudoin wrote: <clip> >We are going to be numbering all of all equipment in the plant in order >to implement a computer aided maintenance system. We have already tried >a couple of approaches to this: numbering by line designation, numbering >by physical zone location, but each system seems to reveal problems >after being used for some time. Usually this occurs when the zone >delimitations are changed(walls being moved, etc.) or when equipment is >moved to a new location. <clip> Don't bother trying to make the numbering system do anything other than identify the machines. This only turns into a mess as machines get moved around. If you are installing new PM software, you might investigate if it allows a "location" field which is not part of the machine number. This will allow you to both identify the machine, and also still record the location in your software (this can be handy for scheduling related items at the same time). The system we use is three letters followed by three numbers. The three letters generally indicate the function of the machine in some way (e.g. "PRE" for "press"), but the actual prefix used isn't critical. If you are starting your number system afresh though, you might want to think about the wider picture. We numbered our equipment for PM purposes, and added asset tags for financial purposes, and are now looking at a third system for identifying machines for documentation, storage of programs and drawings, etc. The problem was that while the PM tag system identifies things which must have PM done to them, and the asset tag identifies chunks of money, nothing unambiguously identifies *machines*. That is, some machines may have several PM or asset tags on various parts of them, so you cannot always pick out a single tag to identify the machine. We hate to have to add still another number system, but we can't (or don't want to) change the existing ones. Everybody will end up calling the same chunk of hardware by a different name (PM, engineering, finance). Some better planning at the beginning might have avoided this problem. ********************** Michael Griffin London, Ont. Canada [email protected] **********************
We once had a numbering system that went like this: AABCD where AA= machine type B= machine model C=machine order (temporal) D=machine subsection E ....X = further breakdown of machine subsections For instance, for a machine type "08" (trimpress) the following number might exist - 08142 - which would translate as a trimpress, manufacturer/model code 1 (which via lookup table represented such-and-such a manufacturer and model), the 4th instance of that type of machine we had obtained, and (via another lookup table) machine group '2' (which was the lubrication system). The numeral '0' was reserved to denote 'all'. For instance, 08000 was the group of all trimpresses, regardless of race, creed, or color, and 08002 represented the group of all trimpress luubrication systems. It worked fairly well for an 8 line plant, and once you got the hang of the system, it was easy to remember a particular machine. It also helped pinpoint specific machines and machine groups that were causing inordinate amounts of downtime. Of course, some of the fields would need to be expanded for a larger plant, or one with many different models of equipment. My friend and mentor Mike had built an immense series of Lotus worksheets - tens of hundreds - interconnected by If/Then statements and self-modifying macros (BTW - this was in the days of Lotus 1A for DOS - quite an accomplishment) than compiled task lists based on these machine numbers, and printed out a mixture of 'per PM' to semi-annual tasks to be performed. I recall it was quite a bit of work to maintain the macros, but we used it successfully for several years before someone decided it was 'too complicated', and we went back to fire-fighting mode. &lt;<off weeping stone >> In any case, this system was not without flaws, and did not attempt to address things like machine location on the plant floor. In hindsight, however, it did what it was supposed to do, and well.