Predictive maintenance only pays back when the alert reaches someone who can act on it, with enough lead time and enough evidence to justify taking an asset out of service. That is the problem we solve.
The programme
- Criticality assessment to decide which assets justify instrumentation
- Vibration, thermal, current-signature and process-based monitoring as appropriate
- Baseline collection over a full production cycle before alerting is enabled
- Alerts delivered into your existing maintenance management system, not a separate portal
- Quarterly review of alert precision, tuning out the sources of false positives
What we do not promise
We do not claim a fixed percentage reduction in downtime before we have seen your failure history. Early in a programme the useful measure is lead time: how much notice an alert gives before the failure it predicted. Cost avoidance follows once that lead time is long enough to schedule around.
Working with existing instrumentation
Many sites already have more sensing than they realise, embedded in drives and controllers. We use what is already there before proposing new hardware, which usually reduces the capital cost of the first phase substantially.