fpf.tools
Library / Engineering Asset Management Principles Framework
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 73–88

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 02:22:15 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 03:38:22 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 05:10:10 UTC

EAM-ASSET - Compare continued use and change for one asset

  • Situation: CityWater can keep pump D functioning under a supported policy, but replacement may give better value.
  • Question: Which policy should the infrastructure committee choose for the required service and horizon?
  • First useful result or blocker: A supported recommendation, or the service, engineering or economic uncertainty preventing it.
  • Start with: EAM.8 for the policies; EAM.1 if the comparison is unclear.
  • Stop or return: Sufficient advice can finish the inquiry. A shared resource constraint sends the policies to the programme comparison.

The committee’s value question differs from the maintenance question of which intervention supports continued functioning. If only a repair estimate is available, EAM.8 first constructs the service policy: supported intervals, recurring duties, later work and ending. Its separate four-year example shows how an omitted year-three overhaul can reverse the comparison. A complete qualified policy can go directly to comparison.

EAM.8 uses the applicable condition and maintenance results to describe two complete policies: continued use with its initial intervention and recurring support, and replacement with integration and terminal value. EAM.9 consumes those qualified alternatives and compares their consequences on the same basis.

In APP-EAM-01, at the example’s 3% real rate, five-year present cost is about €5.080 million for continuation and €3.568 million for replacement. With the required service equal and resources available for either, the €1.512 million difference supports recommending replacement. The break-even annual cost of continued use is about €0.670 million: an applicable range of €0.95–1.05 million leaves the recommendation unchanged, whereas a credible €0.60 million could reverse it. Further costing is useful when its attainable answer can change the decision enough to warrant the inquiry.

EAM.12 uses the comparison and its conditions to give the committee sufficient advice. The committee can then select a policy within its authority; maintenance and operating practitioners settle permissions for the work and return to service. If the request concerned only the maintenance response, the applicable MNT result could already finish it. If D competes with other assets for funding or an outage window, take its two policies into the combination below.