In-house or contractor based condition monitoring

I really can't believe anyone would still use a contractor in this day and age. Bring it in-house would be my advice. The cost of good contractors is so high that you can only really afford them to cover your most critical assets but the cost and ease of use of CBM equipment has now come right down with modern technology. It is not only better but now CHEAPER to do it yourself.

I find that what most people are paying on an annual basis to only cover a fraction of their assets is more than the cost of the CBM equipment and the training i.e. payback in less than one year!

Then there's the issue of "if you want a job doing properly...". Most of the contractor reports I have seen are also the best examples of fence sitting I have ever seen. They usually say things like "we recommend you keep an eye on this" or "inspect at next convenient opportunity", rarely do they say "this is OK" or "this needs urgent attention". The reports always seem to put the responsibility back on the customer. Well if its going to be your call anyway you might as well make sure the readings and data are correct and take them yourself!

Which brings me to my next point, I have seen several instances of reports that are just plain wrong! Unless you bring the data in-house and do the trending yourself you are competely at the mercy of the contractor. If they get it wrong you have no way of knowing. But if a reading isn't right your own personnel will soon pick it up. After all, its their assets and they will soon learn what to expect from them.

I dont care how much experience a contractor has, you wont look after stuff as well as if its your own!

http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&discussionID=49214899&gid=2318673&commentID=36007808&trk=view_disc


Comments (0)

Post a Comment (showhide)
* Your Name:
* Your Email:
(not publicly displayed)
Website:
* Message:

Related Links