Case Study

1.
The erection bay door has been relegated to breakdown maintenance status during the last 20
years or so (as opposed to periodic inspection and preventive maintenance recommended by
the manufacturer). Give arguments for and against this change in the maintenance policy.
The policy discussed in the case study has multiple flaws. Due to these flaws, the policy can
result in damages that can hardly get overhauled. The intensity with which the problem has
been stated in the case study reflects its magnitude. There could be multiple arguments for
supporting and not supporting the maintenance policy discussed in the paper. If we talk about
the arguments for the support of the policy, I believe that the approach used to tackle the
problem is adequate. The problem with erection bay has occurred due to the non-prioritization
of the resources for the facility. The components that are being used by the company are not up
to the mark as they involve high risk. The components are arranged in a manner i.e. from most
likely to cause problem to less likely to cause problem. The usage of dissimilar equipment posed
a lower level threat rather than letting the whole system to shut down. The issue in the door
although would produce multiple effects of ripples for the sake of functioning but at the same
time it is also visible that the fixes to be made would not take much time. With the presence of a
technician on the site such issues can easily be resolved. The ripple effects being produced does
not have a major value hence, they are not as harmful as they sound. The issues can be easily
located whenever they occur and the exact problem can then be fixed. As discussed prior,
although the components or the tasks are being prioritized from the most likely to cause failure
to less likely to cause failure, in this case it is not fully applicable. This is because I believe that
when a company is dealing with a set of risky components, it has to devise its own preventive
measures and regulations in order to avoid any issues in the long term. This leads to the idea for
not supporting the maintenance policy and the idea of keeping the erection bay door with only
one emergency maintenance. For going against the idea, the reasons are precise and
comprehensive. Firstly, the equipment needs to be checked on a regular basis in order to avoid
any problems or complications in future. Secondly, the cost of breakdown is much higher than
the cost of maintenance, hence, as discussed prior, a periodic check on the equipment is a must.
Moreover, other components might not be simple in nature, hence the identification of issues
beforehand though appropriate measures and rules should be done.
2. Is there a design problem in the cover shield assembly? Is there a simple fix?
From the case study, the general problem that was identified was that the bolts were not able
to hold back the couplings surface. Other bolts also needed to be tightened as they were loose
and were indicating that the bolts are dis functional. According to the case study, no buts were
used and all the heavy equipment was relied on the bolts. The reliance of the heavy equipment
only on bolts is major fail of the structure. The vibrations, moreover, in the cove shields caused
the screws to be removed from multiple parts which could be hazardous and can lead to severe
complications. Hence, there is a major design problem which needs a fix so that accidents could
be avoided. Reliable and good quality nuts should be used in the cover shields along with a
torque that could prevent the screws from loosening and will be then tightened. As stated
earlier, cost effective measures should be taken and the design flaws should be corrected in
order to avoid the whole system from getting affected by such complications.
3. Were there adequate maintenance plans in place on the day of the incident?
The case obviously uncovers that there was unmistakably an absence of upkeep designs set up
upon the arrival of the mishap. There are different signs of this inside the contextual
investigation. First would be the absence of human faculty for without hesitation assessment
and examination. A similar individual needed to keep running back toward the north side of the
erection straight to check what caused the issue for the entryway. Also, when the entryway
separated it was left in detachment and after that left at precisely the same stature of 2 meters
to attend of the issue.
Also, the nonappearance of nuts demonstrates the absence of mechanisms to cope up with the
failure. This implies a specialist opinion wasn't generally counseled while building the structure.
This structure oversight is likewise a reasonable sign that the working of the entryway wasn't
set apart as the principal need. This implies the entryway wasn't took care of when legitimately
required.
Consequently, the disappointment shows that consideration of a specialized right hand to the
segments of the entryway. The failure of the door was inescapable considering every one of the
oversights that were occurring at the Erection sound. These are every one of the pointers that
depict us an obvious picture of lacking preventive measures for blunders and specialized
troubles happening inside the erection bay. So in a nutshell, satisfactory upkeep designs were
not in a place that brings up some difficult issues on behalf of the supervision of the office.
4. What do you think OPG should do?
Ontario Power Generation should take the following measures;
- Effective measures to tackle the problems in order to reduce the costs of the breakdown
and maintenance costs.
- Hire a technician that can look after spontaneous problems and could also monitor the
equipment on daily basis in order to avoid any complications.
- A supervisor must be appointed who can continuously and periodically monitor the work
being done by the on-site technicians and the progress
- For the workers, who are working with heavy equipment and risky components, safety
measures should be derived in order to ensure the safety of the workers.

Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1.

You might also like