Abstract
One key objective of good plant asset management is to prevent undesirable failure that may cause loss of life, destruction of asset, loss of economic benefit or damage to the environment. In order to deploy strategies that prevent failure, one needs to first understand the processes leading to failure, and definitions used for describing the failure of physical assets. A number of different definitions for the same terms related to equipment failure can be found in the literature. The looseness of terminology and often overlapping shades of meaning lead to ambiguity and confusion. This paper aims to offer clearer definitions derived from examining a generic failure development process exhibited by physical assets (herein referred to as “equipment”).
Keywords
1. Introduction
Plant Assets are defined as the fixtures, implements, machinery and apparatus that have the purpose of providing an economic and/or social benefit. Failure (of plant assets) is generally understood as the termination of the ability of equipment to perform to its designed capacity. Terms related to failure like failure mode, failure causes, failure effects and failure symptoms, are given different definitions in the plant asset management world. Some definitions of terms found in literature are given in appendix A.
These terms are often used in various ways, leading to confusion and ambiguity in the asset management community. One possible reason for this confusion is that these terms are used in different contexts and times within the failure development process.
2. Background to Risk Management Methodologies
To provide clearer definitions of terms, it is useful to look generically at how an equipment failure develops over a time period. A model for failure terminology within this context is presented in this paper.
2.1. Failure Event
The cause and effect approach is found to be useful. For every effect, there is always at least two causes: at least one action and at least one condition [2]. Conditions change over time and the actions are momentary. For example, to start a fire, the conditions needed are heat, fuel and oxygen. The momentary action required is the action of ignition (such as striking a match).
In the cause and effect chain, the effect is a
In terms of equipment failure, deteriorated physical condition(s) and the action of starting up equipment under these conditions may result in equipment failure. Another example is where the equipment may be in good condition but it is operated beyond its design capacity (e.g. overstress). In other words, a failure event is the result of:
deteriorated equipment conditions and a triggering action, or
good equipment conditions and inappropriate triggering actions
2.2. Failure Symptoms
Failure symptoms are indicators or signs of a failure event. These indicators or signs may manifest before the event occurs (as a “
2.2.1. Before a failure event
A
deteriorated equipment conditions and a triggering action, or
good equipment conditions and inappropriate triggering actions
The deteriorating conditions are often observable via human senses or detectable via instrumentation. The equipment may send out signals or symptoms that it is not ‘feeling too well’ prior to actual failure. These ‘symptoms’ may be referred to as
A new and generic term introduced here is “
2.2.2. After a failure event
After a
In essence,
2.2.3. Failure development process model
The failure development process model is illustrated in Figure 1.

A Model for the Failure Development Process
The blue boxes refer to the physical equipment and a possible
The green boxes refer to processes of investigation after a
The pink boxes refer to the application of a strategy to mitigate a future
Before a
After the
A good investigation of the failure will take into account both
how the failure occurred – the
why the failure occurred – the
Given the results of the investigation, a strategy may then be developed to protect against future failure. The strategy will consist of the following generic features:
An Example of the application of this terminology is provided in Table 1.
3. Conclusion
A number of different definitions for the same terms related to equipment failure are found in literature. The looseness of terminology leads to ambiguity and confusion. This paper offers a reconciled list of definitions by examining the equipment failure development process. The proposed definitions for equipment failure to be used are listed in Table 2.
The “What, How and Why” related to Equipment Failure
Proposed Definitions for Equipment Failure
Appendix A
