Philip Sage

Speaking of Reliability (SOR) Episode 1174

Philip and Fred discuss a common challenge in reliability engineering: using the right tool—not just the one you’re most comfortable with.

Key Points

In this episode of Speaking of Reliability, Fred Schenkelberg and Philip Sage explore a common challenge in reliability engineering: using the right tool—not just the one you’re most comfortable with.

Highlights:

The pitfalls of leading with familiar tools rather than focusing on solving the actual problem.
Why “good enough” isn’t always good enough, but expertise should match the organization’s needs.
Real-world examples: when high-tech solutions win out, and when craftsman expertise still rules.
The importance of assessing what information you need before choosing techniques.
How continuous improvement depends on adaptability and knowing the range of available tools.

Just because you have the expertise doesn’t mean you have to use it. — Fred Schenkelberg

Tune in as our hosts discuss how to appropriately match tools and depth of application to both the problem and the organization.

🔗 Listen now and join the conversation!

Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can join friends as they discuss reliability topics. Join us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches.

Click to play.

Why Reliability Engineering is no Longer Optional

In complex industrial environments, reliability is often treated as a maintenance concern rather than a business priority. Equipment failures are addressed as they occur, teams react under pressure, and performance variability becomes accepted as part of day-to-day operations. Over time, this reactive approach creates a hidden cost structure that impacts production, safety, and long-term asset value.

Unplanned downtime disrupts schedules, increases labor costs, and introduces risk across operations. Maintenance teams are forced into constant firefighting, while leadership lacks the visibility needed to make confident, data driven decisions. What appears to be an isolated failure is often a symptom of deeper systemic issues.

Reliability engineering changes this dynamic. It shifts organizations from reacting to failure toward understanding, predicting, and preventing it. The challenge is not whether reliability matters, but how to approach it in a way that is both technically sound and operationally practical.

The Challenge of One Size Fits All Solutions

Many organizations have attempted to improve reliability through isolated initiatives. A new maintenance strategy is introduced, a software platform is implemented, or a short-term assessment is conducted. While these efforts may provide incremental gains, they often fall short because they are not aligned with the specific context of the operation.

Each facility, asset base, and operating environment has its own set of constraints, risks, and priorities. What works in one organization may not translate effectively to another. Without a tailored approach, reliability programs can become disconnected from the realities of the business.

This is where many efforts lose momentum. Teams invest time and resources but struggle to sustain results. The underlying issue is not a lack of effort, but a lack of alignment between strategy, data, and execution.

A Structured Approach to Reliability Engineering

The Mantua Group approaches reliability engineering as a structured, data driven discipline that is grounded in the operational realities of each client. Rather than applying generic frameworks, the focus is on building a clear understanding of how assets perform, where risks exist, and how decisions impact long term outcomes.

This begins with foundational practices such as reliability centered maintenance, fault tree analysis, and failure mode effects analysis. These methodologies provide a systematic way to evaluate how and why failures occur, and what actions will have the greatest impact on performance.

From there, advanced techniques such as availability simulation and survival analysis allow organizations to model future scenarios. These insights support more informed planning, whether the goal is to optimize maintenance intervals, improve asset utilization, or prioritize capital investments.

The result is not just analysis, but a roadmap that connects technical findings to practical actions.l in periods of inflation, supply volatility, and capital constraint.

Turning Data into Defensible Decisions

One of the most significant challenges in reliability is not the lack of data, but the ability to use it effectively. Organizations collect vast amounts of information through maintenance systems, condition monitoring tools, and operational reporting. However, without the right analytical framework, this data remains underutilized.

The Mantua Group focuses on transforming raw data into defensible insights. Failure data analysis, root cause analysis, and vulnerability assessments provide clarity on where risks are concentrated and how they can be mitigated. This level of rigor supports decisions that are not only technically sound but also justifiable to stakeholders.

For leadership teams, this means greater confidence in planning and investment decisions. For maintenance and reliability professionals, it means having a clear basis for prioritizing work and allocating resources.

Bridging Strategy and Execution

Reliability engineering is most effective when it connects strategy with execution. It is not enough to define what should be done. Organizations must also ensure that processes, systems, and teams are aligned to carry out those actions consistently.

The Mantua Group addresses this through services such as maintenance planning and scheduling uplift, reliability program assessments, and condition monitoring evaluations. These efforts focus on how work is performed, identifying gaps between intended processes and real world execution.

By improving planning and scheduling practices, organizations can reduce inefficiencies, increase workforce productivity, and ensure that the right work is completed at the right time. This creates a more stable operating environment where reliability improvements can be sustained.

Reducing Risk and Improving Asset Performance

At its core, reliability engineering is about managing risk. Every asset carries a probability of failure and a consequence if that failure occurs. Understanding this relationship allows organizations to prioritize efforts where they will have the greatest impact.

Through techniques such as fault tree analysis and vulnerability assessment, The Mantua Group helps organizations quantify and reduce risk in a structured way. This is particularly important in industries where safety, regulatory compliance, and service continuity are critical.

Improving asset reliability also has a direct impact on performance. Increased uptime, more predictable operations, and optimized maintenance strategies contribute to higher overall efficiency. These improvements extend beyond the maintenance function, supporting broader business objectives.

A Partnership Built on Technical Rigor

Choosing a reliability partner is not just about accessing a set of services. It is about working with a team that brings technical depth, analytical rigor, and a commitment to understanding your specific challenges.

The Mantua Group combines expertise across reliability engineering, asset management, and statistical analysis to deliver solutions that are both precise and practical. The focus is on building long term capability within the organization, not just delivering short term results.

This approach ensures that improvements are not dependent on external support alone. Instead, organizations gain the tools, knowledge, and processes needed to sustain reliability over time.

Moving From Reactive to Predictive Operations

The transition from reactive maintenance to predictive and proactive operations does not happen overnight. It requires a clear strategy, the right methodologies, and a willingness to challenge existing assumptions.

With the right partner, this transition becomes more manageable. By combining data driven insights with practical implementation, organizations can move toward a more stable and predictable operating model.

Reliability engineering is not a single project or initiative. It is an ongoing discipline that evolves as assets, technologies, and business priorities change. Establishing this capability creates a foundation for continuous improvement.

Start With a Clear Understanding of Your Current State

Every reliability journey begins with understanding where you are today. Identifying gaps in processes, data, and performance provides the baseline needed to define a path forward.

The Mantua Group works with organizations to assess their current state and develop a tailored approach that aligns with their goals and constraints. This ensures that efforts are focused, measurable, and relevant to the business.

If your organization is experiencing recurring failures, inconsistent performance, or uncertainty in decision making, it may be time to take a more structured approach to reliability.

Take the Next Step Toward Reliable Operations

Reliability engineering is not about eliminating every failure. It is about making informed decisions that reduce risk, improve performance, and support long term success.

The Mantua Group provides the expertise and methodology needed to turn reliability into a strategic advantage. By aligning data, analysis, and execution, organizations can move beyond reactive maintenance and build a more resilient operation.

The next step is to start the conversation and evaluate where reliability improvements can have the greatest impact.

The Mantua Group Can Help

If your organization is ready to move beyond reactive maintenance and thinking reliability is a luxury and is ready to treat reliability as a strategic advantage, The Mantua Group can help. Our expertise in reliability strategy, asset performance, and execution helps organizations unlock safer operations, stronger financial performance, and lasting resilience.

Contact The Mantua Group today to start building reliability that delivers real business results.

Statistical Rigour in the Regulatory Arena: Weibull Analysis Certification and the Victorian AER REPEX Challenge

How independent Weibull MLE certification, aligned with the AER’s 2024 Asset Replacement Planning guidance, contributed to the evidentiary strength of regulatory proposals across Victorian electricity distribution network submissions.

Victorian electricity network service providers are engaged in one of the most consequential regulatory processes in recent memory. The Australian Energy Regulator (AER) has reviewed the combined revenue and capital expenditure proposals of five Victorian distributors, AusNet Services, Jemena, Citipower, Powercor, and United Energy, for the five-year regulatory control period commencing 2026.

The AER’s draft determination trimmed the distributors’ collective capex claims by approximately $3.7 billion, with the contested quantum approaching $2.9 billion once the revised proposals were filed. Central to the regulatory debate is the quality and defensibility of probabilistic asset replacement expenditure (REPEX) modelling, and, in particular, the statistical validity of the Weibull-based Probability of Failure (PoF) functions that underpin each distributor’s replacement case.

The Mantua Group (TMG) provided independent Weibull Analysis certification and expert advisory services to selected network service providers engaged in this regulatory process. Our work, conducted in alignment with the AER’s 2024 Asset Replacement Planning (ARP) Practice Note and the AER REPEX Model Framework, strengthened the statistical foundation of REPEX submissions across key asset classes, including distribution transformers, substation power transformers, and overhead conductors. This white paper describes the regulatory context, the methodology we applied, and the outcomes attributable to TMG’s involvement.

Weibull Statistical Analysis for Transmission Asset Reliability

Applying Weibull for Maximum Likelihood Estimation to Left-Truncated and Right-Censored Lifetime Data

This white paper presents a rigorous statistical methodology for analyzing transmission line asset reliability using Weibull distribution analysis. The approach specifically addresses the analytical challenges inherent in utility asset data: left-truncated observations from legacy system migrations and informatively right-censored data from inspection-driven replacement programs.

A study of approximately 15,000 transmission structures across an 11,000-kilometer network demonstrates the Weibull methodology’s practical application. By employing Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) rather than ordinary least squares regression, the analysis produces unbiased parameter estimates even under complex censoring conditions that would render traditional approaches unreliable.

Key findings reveal that unique classification of assets exhibit similar but different reliability characteristics, with characteristic lives (η) of 60 and 75 years, respectively, and shape parameters (β) indicating wear-out failure modes in both populations.

Wood Decay Engineering for Transmission Pole Assessment

Applying AS 1170.5 Draft Wood Decay Modeling to Predict Functional and Catastrophic Failure Thresholds

This white paper presents an engineering methodology for predicting wood pole deterioration using decay progression models aligned with AS 1170.5 Draft, the Australian standard. The approach integrates field-measured decay rates from test stake programs with pole geometry to establish both functional failure (FF) and catastrophic failure (CF) thresholds for transmission structures.

A critical finding is that failure timing is highly dependent on original pole diameter, not simply pole age. Analysis demonstrates that functional failure for minimum-diameter poles may occur 50 years before maximum-diameter poles of the same age and treatment cohort, fundamentally changing how asset managers should prioritize inspections and replacements.

The methodology incorporates treatment effects for both Pressure Impregnated (PI) and Natural Round (NR) timber, accounting for preservative type, retention levels, and the progression of wood decay through sapwood, outer heartwood, and inner heartwood (corewood) zones.