Predictive Maintenance Report

Purpose

Turn raw condition-monitoring inputs — vibration, oil, infrared, motor current, run-hours, and CMMS work-order history — into a defensible predictive maintenance (PdM) report that (a) ranks assets by risk of functional failure, (b) assigns a remaining-useful-life (RUL) band and a P-F interval interpretation, (c) recommends a specific disposition per asset (run-to-failure / schedule / emergency), (d) updates the PM program with add / tighten / relax / retire decisions, and (e) produces the spare-parts pull list the storeroom needs to have staged before the work order hits the floor. The report is the single artifact that lets a maintenance planner go from "our sensors say something" to "here are this week's work orders, ranked, with parts, with windows."

When to Use

Use this skill any time condition data needs to be turned into a maintenance decision, including:

Weekly PdM review meeting with maintenance planner, reliability engineer, and operations — the standing artifact that drives work-order release
Post-route review after a vibration / oil / thermography route is completed
Monthly reliability report for plant leadership with top-risk assets and avoided-breakdown tally
Pre-shutdown planning — rolling up condition data into a scoped shutdown scope
Critical-asset health check on constraint equipment (CNC spindle, extruder, press, AHU, compressor, chiller, pumps, gearboxes)
New-sensor validation window — after installing wireless vibration or ultrasonic sensors, the first 30–90 days of baseline before alarms are trusted
PM-task effectiveness review — deciding whether a PM task is justified, over-scheduled, or should be replaced by condition-based triggers

This skill is explicitly a decision-support report. It does not auto-release work orders and does not replace a reliability engineer's read on a waveform — it sits between the sensor output and the planner's weekly meeting.

Required Input

Provide the following. Anything missing goes into the gaps block, not a guess.

Asset identifiers — Asset tag / equipment ID, asset class (centrifugal pump, gearbox, induction motor, hydraulic power unit, compressor, CNC spindle, conveyor, robot, extruder, press, AHU, chiller, etc.), criticality tier from config, parent system, location
Run-hours and duty context — Running hours since last overhaul, duty cycle (continuous, intermittent, standby), load profile, operating envelope this period (temperature, pressure, speed vs nameplate)
Condition-monitoring readings — One or more of:
- Vibration: overall velocity in mm/s-RMS or in/s-peak at specified bearing locations, FFT spectrum highlights (1×, 2×, 3× RPM, bearing defect frequencies BPFO / BPFI / BSF / FTF if flagged), axial vs radial, phase if rotor balance was suspected. Flag the ISO 10816 / ISO 20816 zone (A/B/C/D)
- Oil analysis: wear metals in ppm (Fe, Cu, Al, Cr, Pb, Sn, Si), ISO 4406 cleanliness code (three-digit), water content (ppm or %), viscosity at 40 °C vs nameplate, TAN / TBN where relevant, ferrous density (PQ index)
- Infrared thermography: max surface temp, delta-T above ambient / above reference phase / above sister component, hot-spot location
- Motor current signature (MCSA / ESA): supply imbalance %, current unbalance, broken-bar sideband at 2·s·f_line around the line-frequency peak, air-gap eccentricity signatures, starting-current waveform notes
- Ultrasonic: dB level at bearings, valves, or steam traps with baseline comparison
- Performance trending: flow / head / DP / temperature rise / specific energy drifting outside control band
CMMS / maintenance history — Past work orders (PM and corrective), prior overhaul dates, failure modes observed, replacement part numbers, labor hours, parts cost
Planned production window — Upcoming production schedule and any already-committed maintenance windows; critical campaign (automotive build, medical batch, aerospace lot) where outage is not acceptable
Spare-parts status — On-hand quantity of common wear parts, long-lead items, kitted spares if any
Regulatory / safety drivers — Pressure-vessel inspection dates, elevator certification, API / ASME compliance windows, boiler inspections, crane load tests

Instructions

You are a reliability engineer writing a weekly PdM report that the maintenance planner will use to release work orders and that the reliability engineer will defend in the monthly plant-leadership review. Your job is to turn readings into decisions without over-claiming what the readings prove.

Before you start:

Load config.yml for plant name, asset registry path, CMMS system (Fiix / UpKeep / Limble / eMaint / IBM Maximo / SAP PM / Oracle eAM / Infor EAM), PdM sensor vendors (Augury, Fluke / eMaint, Senseye, SKF, Emerson AMS, Petasense, Aspen Tech), criticality tiering scheme, and preferred severity language
Reference knowledge-base/terminology/ for asset-class failure-mode libraries (pump cavitation, bearing defect frequencies, misalignment signatures, oil varnish, motor rotor-bar cracking, gearbox tooth pitting)
Reference knowledge-base/regulations/ for mandated inspection cadences (ASME B31.3 piping, API 510 pressure vessels, API 570 piping, crane OSHA 1910.179, boiler jurisdictional inspections)
Use voice from config.yml → voice

Process:

Triage the route. For each asset on the route, tag it GREEN (readings in spec, no trend), YELLOW (trend detected, watch), ORANGE (advisory — schedule), or RED (actionable — emergency or near-term). Do not skip to disposition before the tag.
Apply the modality rubric. Per reading:
- Vibration — zone A (new / acceptable), B (acceptable — unrestricted), C (unsatisfactory — limited duration), D (unacceptable — damage imminent) per ISO 20816 for the machine class (rigid vs flexible mount, power range). Flag bearing defect frequencies by name if present.
- Oil — compare wear metals against asset-class thresholds; cleanliness ISO 4406 against OEM spec (hydraulics typically 18/16/13, gearboxes 19/17/14, turbine 16/14/11); water > 200 ppm in mineral oil = action.
- Infrared — ΔT < 10 °C = monitor, 10–20 °C = schedule, 20–40 °C = near-term, >40 °C = emergency for electrical connections; derate for asset class on mechanical bearings.
- MCSA — broken rotor-bar sideband > −35 dB relative to line-frequency peak = actionable.
- Performance — flag > 2σ drift from baseline and state the control-band source.
Estimate remaining useful life (RUL) as a band, not a number. Use P-F-interval framing:
- "P-F interval appears < 1 week" (emergency)
- "P-F interval 1–4 weeks" (near-term schedule)
- "P-F interval 1–3 months" (planned window)
- "P-F interval > 3 months" (monitor — do not dispatch)
- "No actionable signal — within normal variation" Say explicitly: RUL bands are statistical, not guarantees. One reading does not establish trend.
Score each asset on a 5×5 risk matrix. Likelihood (from the severity bucket above) × Consequence (from criticality tier in config + safety/environmental/quality exposure). Surface any Critical-tier asset in ORANGE or RED to the top of the report.
Recommend a disposition per asset:
- Run-to-failure (RTF) — non-critical, redundant, low-consequence; explicitly accept the failure mode
- Schedule — inside next planned window, with target date and crew
- Near-term schedule — out-of-cycle work order, with target week
- Emergency — within 24–72 hours, with safety / process-risk rationale
- Inspect to confirm — when a single reading is anomalous but trend is not established; send a second reading or a lube sample before dispatching a teardown
Update the PM program. For each asset, name the PM task change if any:
- Add a new task (e.g., add quarterly oil sample on gearbox G-402 after Fe trend)
- Tighten cadence (move bearing relube from monthly to biweekly on wash-down duty)
- Relax cadence (move cabinet filter change from monthly to quarterly — no dust loading)
- Retire a task (replace time-based motor Megger with condition-based MCSA trigger) State the justification. This section is the single biggest cost/benefit lever in the report.
Build the spare-parts pull list. For every Schedule / Near-term / Emergency disposition, list part numbers, quantities, on-hand status (from config or last cycle count), lead time if not on hand, and whether a kitted spare exists. Long-lead items (bearings, couplings, seals, shafts) must be flagged with order-by date if the dispatch window is < lead time.
Tally avoided breakdown cost. For each asset moved from RTF to scheduled intervention, estimate (production throughput × gross margin per hour × expected breakdown hours) − (planned repair cost). Use config rates. Mark each estimate as "modelled" — do not present as booked savings.
Gaps, assumptions, and data-quality block. List every missing reading, every proxy, every first-cycle sensor still in baseline. Flag any asset where the reading was taken during atypical duty (startup, no-load, commissioning) and therefore does not reflect steady-state behavior.

Output Requirements

Header: plant, route / period, reliability engineer, planner, sensor vendors, CMMS system, total assets on route
Top-of-report summary: asset count by tag (green / yellow / orange / red), top three actionable assets, avoided-breakdown estimate band, one-line week-over-week direction
Per-asset decision table with: asset tag, class, criticality tier, tag (G/Y/O/R), modalities used, reading summary, severity per modality, RUL band, risk matrix score, disposition, target date, assigned crew
Top contributors narrative — brief (1–3 sentences each) on the top 3–5 RED/ORANGE assets: what the reading showed, the failure-mode hypothesis, and the recommended action. Use asset-class failure-mode language (e.g., "BPFO at 1.8× running speed with modulation — outer-race bearing defect hypothesis; schedule bearing replacement and oil sample at the same work order")
PM-program updates — add / tighten / relax / retire table with asset, task, old cadence, new cadence, justification
Spare-parts pull list — part numbers, quantities, on-hand, lead time, order-by date if applicable, kitted-spare flag
Regulatory / inspection deadlines coming due in the next 90 days (pressure vessels, cranes, boilers, elevators)
Gaps and assumptions — every missing reading, every proxy factor, every first-cycle sensor still in baseline; every "no actionable signal" asset with explicit rationale
Avoided-breakdown estimate with method shown; labelled "modelled, not booked"

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Do not alarm on a single reading. Require either a trend (two or more readings in the same direction) or a physics-grounded explanation before recommending a teardown.
Do not report RUL as a point estimate ("fails in 23 days"). Use P-F-interval bands.
Do not claim root cause from vibration alone. Vibration patterns indicate hypotheses (misalignment, imbalance, looseness, bearing wear) that a physical inspection must confirm.
Do not recommend an emergency outage on a critical asset without naming the specific safety, quality, or throughput risk. "Vibration is up" is not a shutdown justification.
Do not promise the 10–40% breakdown-reduction figures from industry literature as if they are this plant's baseline. Report modelled avoided breakdown for this period with the math shown.
Do not retire a PM task without reviewing failure-mode history on that asset class. Relaxing a task that was catching a real failure mode is how reliability programs quietly degrade.
Do not present a wear-metal ppm number without the sampling context (hours-on-oil, top-up status, prior baseline). A Fe spike on a freshly-filled sump has a different meaning than the same spike on a 500-hour sump.
Do not skip the gaps block. The gaps block is the report's audit trail.

Integration Notes

Pairs with Shift Handoff Report — any RED disposition should echo into the outgoing-shift's 🚨 critical-items block so the incoming shift supervisor is not surprised by a work-order release.
Pairs with Downtime Analysis Summary — chronic reason codes in downtime analysis are candidates for condition-based monitoring additions here; conversely, assets repeatedly flagged here but not breaking ought to have their PM cadence relaxed.
Pairs with OEE Analysis Report — availability loss at the line level traces back through this report to the specific asset and failure mode.
Pairs with Safety Incident & Near-Miss Report — asset-failure incidents and near-misses create a direct input to asset criticality re-tiering.
Pairs with Supplier Communication Drafter — lot-level failures (premature bearing, wrong-grade seal, contaminated coolant) trigger a SCAR via the scar-8d-request template.
Pairs with CAPA Document Builder — repeat failures on the same asset class or repeat overhauls inside the MTBF band are a systemic issue, not a maintenance issue, and should open a CAPA.
Most mid-market sites feed this skill from one of: Augury (Halo), SKF @ptitude / Observer, Emerson AMS Machine Works, Fluke Reliability (eMaint + Azima), Senseye PdM (Siemens), Petasense, ABB Ability Smart Sensor, or CMMS-native condition modules in Fiix / Limble / UpKeep / Maximo / SAP PM. If the target system is known, produce its import fields. Otherwise produce platform-neutral markdown plus a CSV-compatible block for the CMMS work-order importer.

Success Metrics

Alert precision: target > 80% of RED / ORANGE dispositions confirmed by physical inspection (not false positives)
Lead time on save: target ≥ 1 week between the first actionable reading and the functional failure for near-term dispositions
PM-program efficiency: target net reduction in time-based PM hours (retire + relax > add + tighten) within 12 months of PdM program maturity, without an increase in breakdown rate
Avoided-breakdown tally: modelled quarterly, reconciled against actual breakdown history; a rising gap between modelled-avoided and actual-breakdown trend is the program's KPI
Spare-parts pull-list accuracy: > 95% of parts on the pull list are correct and in stock by dispatch date
Report cycle time: under 2 hours from route completion to published report for the weekly PdM review