02.09 · Operations & Maintenance

Your plant is losing money
to the same failures
every month.

Most plants fix the same equipment repeatedly. The work order closes, the asset runs, and six weeks later — the same failure. This is not a maintenance execution problem. It is a defect problem. Optimal's Defect Elimination programme — embedded within ARaaS® — identifies and permanently removes the chronic failure patterns draining your production and maintenance budget.

20–50%
Typical reduction in unplanned downtime through structured DE programmes
35,000+
Maintainable items in Optimal's library — built over 10 years with Aberdeen University
10–20%
Reduction in maintenance cost achieved through elimination of repeat failures
ARaaS®
Defect Elimination is always embedded — never a standalone exercise
The Business Case

What chronic failures
are actually costing you

Most Plant and Operations Directors can name their worst assets without looking at a report. The pump on Train 3. The fan on the dryer line. The compressor that goes down every eight weeks. They are fixed, they run, they fail again.

The direct cost of each repair is visible — labour, parts, production loss. What is rarely quantified is the accumulated cost of the pattern: the planning effort tied up on known bad actors, the spare parts held against failures that should not happen, the production scheduling built around an asset that cannot be trusted.

A single chronic failure asset, generating six unplanned interventions per year with an average four-hour production impact, can represent hundreds of thousands in real cost — before a single bearing or seal is invoiced. Defect Elimination is not a maintenance programme. It is a financial intervention.

Read our Defect Elimination deep-dive
What your organisation is likely experiencing
01
The same assets appear on your weekly breakdown report repeatedly. Your maintenance team know which equipment will fail next. That knowledge alone is a signal that patterns exist — and patterns can be eliminated.
02
Maintenance cost is rising without a corresponding improvement in availability. More spend, more interventions, more parts — but the same unplanned events. Reactive maintenance is self-perpetuating without structured intervention.
03
Your planning team spends more time expediting than planning. When chronic failures dominate the schedule, genuine planned maintenance is displaced. The system defaults to reactive — and stays there.
04
Root cause analyses have been conducted but the failures continue. RCA investigates individual failures in isolation. Defect Elimination addresses the patterns — the conditions and practices that allow defects to exist in the plant in the first place.
05
You cannot reliably commit to a production target. When asset performance is unpredictable, the organisation builds contingency into production plans. That contingency has a cost — and it persists until the underlying reliability is resolved.
"

"Most organisations have far more defects than can be ascribed to normal wear and tear. There are defects that are not inevitable — and if we prevent them from ever entering the plant, we can avoid all the work required to detect and remove them."

Defect Elimination 101 — Reliability.com · adapted by Optimal
What Defect Elimination Is

It is not root cause analysis.
It goes further.

A defect is anything that erodes value, reduces production, compromises safety or environmental performance, or creates waste. Not just broken components — operating procedures that introduce wear, installation practices that cause misalignment, procurement decisions that introduce sub-specification materials.

Root Cause Analysis is reactive — it investigates a failure after it has occurred and recommends a corrective action. Defect Elimination is proactive and systemic. It identifies the conditions that allow defects to enter and persist in the plant, eliminates those conditions at source, and confirms through ongoing measurement that they do not return.

The distinction matters to a Plant Director because RCA generates reports. Defect Elimination generates sustained changes in MTBF, maintenance cost and production availability — measurable outcomes that appear on the P&L.

Defect Elimination vs. Root Cause Analysis
Root Cause Analysis
Defect Elimination (Optimal)
Triggered by a specific failure event
Triggered by patterns across multiple failures
Investigates one failure at a time
Addresses the systemic conditions enabling failures
Produces a corrective action recommendation
Produces a permanent change in asset behaviour
Measures: was the action completed?
Measures: did MTBF improve? Did cost reduce?
Knowledge stays with the analyst
Knowledge transfers into CMMS, procedures and culture
Reactive — applied after failure
Proactive — eliminates the conditions before failure recurs
Where Defects Come From

Most defects are not random.
They have an origin.

Understanding the sources of defects is what separates elimination from repair. Optimal's programme traces chronic failures back to their origin — the decisions, practices and conditions that allowed the defect to enter the plant — and closes those pathways permanently.

Operating Procedures
Incorrect or outdated operating procedures introduce stress, improper loading and out-of-specification conditions during normal production. Equipment is operated in ways that accelerate degradation — often without the operator or maintenance team being aware. These defects enter the plant quietly and compound over time.
Maintenance Practices
Misalignment during reinstallation. Under- or over-torqued fasteners. Contaminated lubrication introduced during a PM. Incorrect bearing installation creating immediate fatigue loading. These are the defects introduced by maintenance — the activities intended to prevent failure — when procedures, tooling and skills are not to standard.
Design & Specification
Equipment selected for duty conditions that have since changed. Undersized pipe runs introducing flow turbulence. Mounting arrangements creating resonance at operating speed. Design defects are often the hardest to identify because the equipment was never fit for purpose — and will not perform until the root specification is addressed.
Procurement & Materials
Sub-specification materials entering the store undetected. Counterfeit or non-OEM components that do not meet the original performance requirement. Inadequate storage introducing corrosion or contamination before installation. The defect begins in the supply chain — often weeks before the component reaches the asset.
Contractor & Vendor Practices
Third-party maintainers working to their own procedures — not yours. Contractors who are not trained on site-specific requirements introducing defects during major maintenance or outage work. The failure appears weeks later, after the contractor has left site, and the connection is not made. Contractor-introduced defects are systematically underreported.
Age & Normal Wear
Some degradation is inevitable — the asset ages, operating conditions change, and maintenance intervals designed for new plant become insufficient. This is the only category where defect is truly unavoidable. Optimal's programme distinguishes between inevitable wear and avoidable defect — focusing intervention where it delivers the greatest return.
Technical Depth

The defects that go undetected
until they become failures

The most common chronic failure modes are not random events — they are identifiable fault signatures that remain latent until a threshold is crossed. Optimal's 35,000+ item maintainable library provides the failure mode taxonomy to find them systematically.

Rotating Equipment · Fans
Common Latent Fault Signatures
Misalignment Field fault — stator Field fault — rotor Looseness Unbalance Belt fault
Rotating Equipment · Pumps
Common Latent Fault Signatures
Unbalance Misalignment Component resonance Blade-pass frequencies Turbulences Coupling fault Looseness Belt fault
Rotating Equipment · Compressors & Gearboxes
Common Latent Fault Signatures
Gear mesh frequency Oil film instability Shaft rub Seal leakage Surge Looseness Misalignment
Motor train signal parameters — full cross-domain analysis
Power Supply (P1)
Voltage level Voltage unbalance Harmonic distortion Total distortion Power Harmonics VFD details
Motor
Load % Rotor bar Current level Current unbalance Effective Service Factor Operating condition Power Factor Efficiency
Load (P4)
Torque Speed Over current Load unbalance Load variance
The Programme

Three phases.
One measurable outcome.

Optimal's Defect Elimination programme follows a structured three-phase lifecycle — from identifying the bad actors costing the most, through systematic execution and data-driven intervention, to continuous improvement and ROI confirmation. Every phase produces a defined output. Progress is measured against agreed KPIs throughout.

01
Program Design
Identify, prioritise and scope
Identify bad actors — the assets with the highest frequency and cost of failure
Quantify the impact of downtime per asset and prioritise by financial consequence
Select equipment for the study and agree KPIs — MTBF, availability, maintenance cost per asset
Develop fit-for-programme scope and establish baseline measurements
Define goals that are commercially meaningful to the Plant Director — not just reliability metrics
Fit-for-risk scope confirmed. Defects prioritised by consequence. Baseline established.
02
Programme Execution
Deploy, collect and intervene
Plan and implement the ARaaS® programme against agreed scope
Deploy predictive analytics, prescriptive maintenance, RCM analysis and condition-based monitoring tools to identify defects
Execute field diagnostics and collect condition data at asset level
Assess data, confirm defect hypotheses and implement targeted interventions
Track KPIs in real time — MTBF, maintenance cost, downtime frequency and duration
Programme scope executed. Defects confirmed and interventions completed. KPI tracking live.
03
Stewardship & Improvement
Confirm, optimise and sustain
Programme analysis and reporting — measure progress against defined goals
Measure recurrence — confirm that eliminated defects have not returned
Quantify ROI against the baseline established in Phase 1
Implement continual improvement — use learnings to extend programme to adjacent assets
Communicate wins — build the internal reliability culture that sustains the gains
Analysis conducted. Learnings applied. ROI confirmed and communicated to leadership.
The ARaaS® ToolBox

The tools Optimal deploys
inside every programme

Defect Elimination does not work with generic maintenance thinking. It requires specific analytical tools, field diagnostics and a failure mode library large enough to recognise patterns that are invisible to an organisation looking at its own data. Optimal's ARaaS® ToolBox provides all of these — built and validated over a decade of project delivery.

Knowledge Foundation
35,000+ Maintainable Items — 10 Years in Development
Optimal's RCM-based failure mode library covers asset-intensive industries at component level. Built over 10 years through project delivery and a formal Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) with the University of Aberdeen — providing a failure taxonomy that no single organisation can replicate from its own CMMS data alone. When we look at your chronic failure assets, we already know what to look for.
35K+
RCM Maintainable Item Library
Component-level failure mode coverage across rotating equipment, static plant, electrical, instrumentation and structural assets — built through a decade of project delivery and formalised through the KTP with Aberdeen University. The library provides the failure taxonomy that drives rapid bad actor identification and targeted defect hypothesis.
PdA
Predictive Analytics
Cross-domain data analysis combining vibration, thermography, ultrasound, oil analysis and motor current signature into a unified picture of asset health. Identifies latent fault signatures before they reach the failure threshold — giving the programme the lead time to eliminate defects rather than respond to consequences.
ROI
Cost-Optimised Maintenance Strategies
RCM-informed maintenance planning linked to real financial modelling — not generic maintenance cost benchmarks. Optimal structures maintenance intervals and task selection to the consequence of failure, not calendar convention. The result is a maintenance plan that costs less and delivers more — because it is built on failure mode analysis, not history and habit.
FD
Field Diagnostics
Condition-based assessment and fault signature analysis conducted at asset level by Optimal's engineers — not remote interpretation of sensor data. Vibration analysis, thermal imaging, motor current analysis and ultrasound inspection deployed systematically against the identified bad actors to confirm defect hypotheses with physical evidence.
DT
Digital Twin Simulation
Advanced virtual modelling for complex asset behaviour — predicting how a system will respond to proposed interventions before implementation. Particularly valuable for high-consequence assets where a trial-and-error approach to defect elimination carries unacceptable risk. Simulation confirms the intervention logic before plant downtime is committed.
RCM
Reliability-Centred Maintenance
Proactive, risk-based maintenance planning and execution — the methodology that underpins Optimal's failure mode library and the foundation of every DE programme. RCM ensures that the maintenance tasks responding to identified defects are correctly targeted at the failure mode, not defaulted to calendar-based replacement that may not address the actual root of the problem.
Delivered Results

Two programmes.
Measurable outcomes.

LNG · Northern Europe
LNG Liquefaction Plant  ·  Residual Life Assessment & Defect Identification

Transitioning a mature LNG facility from early-life reliability assumptions to an evidence-based operational baseline

An LNG liquefaction operator engaged Optimal to conduct the initial review stages of a Residual Life Assessment (RLA) — transitioning the plant from an early-life reliability phase towards a more mature operational model, with ageing equipment and associated risk profiles clearly documented. The existing CMMS contained inconsistencies and gaps that were masking the true condition of the asset base. Optimal applied the ARaaS® ToolBox to conduct desktop asset verification, historic maintenance review to establish ageing and degradation mechanisms, condition scoring, and RLA toolkit population for further study and life extension planning.

Identified key equipment and its condition — degradation mechanisms confirmed and documented
Addressed CMMS inconsistencies and equipment data misalignment through systematic desktop asset verification against the master equipment list
Developed and populated the RLA toolkit — providing the operator with a structured baseline for future life extension decisions
Identified vulnerable equipment and assigned condition scores — prioritising defect elimination effort by consequence and degradation severity
Offshore Oil & Gas · UK North Sea
Major Offshore Platform Operator  ·  Power Generation Maintenance Review

Improving turbine availability from 92% to 98% on dual-fuel aeroderivative power generation systems

A major North Sea operator engaged Optimal following unacceptable levels of unplanned shutdowns on two offshore platforms with dual-fuel aeroderivative turbines. Despite redundancy in the generation system, load shedding events during high-demand periods were creating production interruptions. Optimal undertook a Failure Mode driven maintenance and spares strategy review across five turbines with differing ages and manufacturing origins, identifying systemic defects invisible to the operator's existing maintenance regime. The programme included RCM analysis, spares review, vulnerability assessment and a complex cross-organisational RCM project conducted in collaboration with client engineers and external stakeholders.

Turbine availability improved from 92% to 98% — eliminating the production interruption risk that triggered the engagement
Completely new suite of bespoke systematic maintenance tasks developed in SAP-compliant format — replacing calendar-based tasks with failure-mode-targeted interventions
40 new vulnerabilities identified across the five-turbine fleet — defined within a Vulnerability Report with prioritised remediation recommendations
Spare parts lists updated against preservation targets to ensure rapid reinstatement capability following any unplanned outage
Demonstrated the capability to conduct a complex RCM project at scale through remote collaboration — subsequently adopted as a model for future cross-site programmes
Where This Sits

Defect Elimination is embedded
within ARaaS® — not sold separately.

Defect Elimination is not a standalone engagement at Optimal. It is the execution phase of the ARaaS® cycle — the point at which the failure mode analysis, condition monitoring and reliability strategy converge into tangible, measurable plant improvement.

This matters because the most common reason DE programmes fail is that they are conducted in isolation from the maintenance strategy and monitoring infrastructure that sustains the improvement. A defect eliminated without changing the conditions that allowed it to exist will return. ARaaS® closes that loop.

Understand the full ARaaS® framework
Defect Elimination in the ARaaS® Cycle
01 — STRATEGISE
Asset criticality & failure mode analysis
Provides the failure taxonomy and bad actor identification that scopes the DE programme.
02 — DEPLOY ← DE lives here
Defect Elimination programme execution
Field diagnostics, targeted interventions, CMMS update and procedure changes — eliminating defects at source.
03 — MONITOR
KPI tracking & recurrence confirmation
Confirms that eliminated defects have not returned. MTBF, cost and availability tracked continuously.
04 — OPTIMISE
Programme extension & learning transfer
Lessons from eliminated defects inform strategy updates, procedure changes and adjacent asset programmes.
Further Reading
Defect Elimination — The Optimal Perspective
Our technical blog covers the principles, methodology and real-world application of Defect Elimination in asset-intensive industries — written for engineers and operations leaders who want to understand the discipline before engaging a programme. Required reading before any DE conversation.
Read the blog post →

Ready to name your
worst bad actors?

Every Defect Elimination programme begins with a conversation about your chronic failure assets — the ones your maintenance team already knows. We will tell you honestly whether a structured DE programme is warranted, what it would look like within your ARaaS® context, and what outcomes are realistic. No obligation. No proposal before the conversation.

GARPI™ 2026

Not sure where to start? Benchmark your asset management maturity first.

The Global Asset Reliability & Performance Index is Optimal's free industry benchmarking survey — giving you a structured view of where your organisation stands against global peers before committing to any programme.

Take the GARPI™ Survey →
Menu
Defect Elimination → Predictive Maintenance ARaaS® Framework
GARPI™ SURVEY CONTACT US