Direct answer
Record stops automatically, rank assets by criticality and failure cost, then apply the appropriate strategy — redesign, planned maintenance, condition monitoring or spares — per failure mode.
How this problem shows up
- Downtime causes recorded inconsistently or not at all
- Repeat failures on the same assets
- Long waits for spare parts
- Maintenance is predominantly reactive
- Obsolete equipment with unsupported components
Engineering responses
Automatic downtime capture
PLC-level event logging replacing manual records.
Criticality and failure mode analysis
Focus resource where stoppage cost is highest.
Condition monitoring
Vibration, thermal and current signature on critical rotating assets.
Spares and obsolescence strategy
Critical spares held against lead-time and support risk.
Engineering and project considerations
- Reliability is designed in: specify MTBF-relevant requirements when buying
- Availability targets must include planned maintenance windows
- Condition monitoring only pays where failure is progressive and detectable
- Maintenance skills and documentation are as important as technology
- Consequential loss determines redundancy decisions
What to prepare before engaging engineering companies
- 12 months of stop events with duration and cause
- Asset criticality ranking
- Spare part lead times for critical components
- Maintenance staffing and skill profile
What to measure
Frequently asked questions
Is predictive maintenance worth it?
On critical assets with progressive, detectable failure modes, yes. On simple assets with random failures, spares and fast repair are more economical.
Related engineering knowledge
Independent, buyer-side and supplier-neutral
Global B2B Group does not sell machines and does not represent equipment manufacturers. This material is published to help industrial organisations define the problem, prepare the specification and structure the investment before engineering partners are selected.