definicion manual organizacional
definicion manual organizacional
File Name:definicion manual organizacional.pdf
Size: 4444 KB
Type: PDF, ePub, eBook
Uploaded: 21 May 2019, 20:18
Rating: 4.6/5 from 743 votes.
Last checked: 13 Minutes ago!
eBook includes PDF, ePub and Kindle version
In order to read or download definicion manual organizacional ebook, you need to create a FREE account.
✔ Register a free 1 month Trial Account.
✔ Download as many books as you like (Personal use)
✔ Cancel the membership at any time if not satisfied.
✔ Join Over 80000 Happy Readers
definicion manual organizacional
Disclaimer: Sedo maintains no relationship with third party advertisers. Reference to any specific service or trade mark is not controlled by Sedo nor does it constitute or imply its association, endorsement or recommendation. To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser. You can download the paper by clicking the button above. Related Papers Que es el MOF By Rocio Trejo P ESTRUCTURAS ORGANIZACIONALES By Grecia Hidalgo Castro PLANIFICACION ESTRETEGICA By Mary Luz Romo Quispe Manual de organizacion de empresa textil By Veronica Mhodz TESIS CONTROL INTERNO By Consultoria Pahm READ PAPER Download file. NUBE Negocios e inversiones Srl. Churakuy 2 de may de 2019 La importancia del manual de organizacion y funciones Micro, pequena o mediana, todas necesitan una guia de la forma organizativa de la empresa, del mismo modo es importante que todos los colaboradores conozcan y entiendan la vision, mision y valores a los que se orienta la empresa. Es comun que en algunas ocasiones los trabajadores no saben lo que deben hacer, sobre todo cuando recien ingresan y se pierde tiempo hasta que descubren cuales son funciones o roles, o con que personas deben coordinar directamente. Esto se debe a la falta del manual de organizacion y funciones de la empresa (MOF). ?Que es el MOF? Proporciona informacion a los funcionarios y servidores sobre sus funciones especificas, su dependencia y coordinacion para el cumplimiento de sus funciones. Facilita el proceso de induccion del personal y permite la orientacion de las funciones y responsabilidades del cargo al que han sido asignados, asi como aplicar programas de capacitacion. Determina las funciones especificas, responsabilidad y autoridad de los cargos dentro de la estructura organica de cada dependencia. ?Como hago el MOF? Antes de iniciar la elaboracion del MOF, primero hay que definir la estructura que tendra el mismo.
definicion manual de organizacion, definicion de manual organizacional segun autores, definicion manual organizacional.
Cada manual requiere de caracteristicas especificas y particulares como el lenguaje, ejemplos graficos, etc. A continuacion, te damos a conocer algunos puntos importantes en su elaboracion: En la redaccion del manual, es importante diferenciar la redaccion, ya que hay segmentos que van dirigidos a directivos o bien, al operador de planta, de ahi la necesidad de identificar plenamente quienes leeran el manual para utilizar el lenguaje y el contenido correctos. Identificar los procesos criticos y definir si el manual se realizara por puesto, por area o para toda la organizacion. Esta clasificacion permitira saber si necesitas elaborar sub-manuales o guias operativas para cada caso. No olvidar definir la mision, vision y politicas que delinearan el desempeno de cada individuo, determinado los factores importantes para el desarrollo de la empresa. La redaccion del manual debe ser de manera agil, dinamica y concreta; de ser necesario incluye graficos, pues puede ser mucho mas entendible mostrar imagenes en la elaboracion de la tarea. Los manuales deben actualizarse constantemente al menos una vez al ano y realizar los cambios necesarios. Sabes ?Que funciones realiza cada uno de tus colaboradores?, ?Como las funciones o procesos aportan en los resultados de tu MIPYME. Al implementar el MOF en tu empresa podras analizar la cantidad y tiempos de realizacion de tareas que realiza un colaborador y mejorar la efectividad del trabajo asignado de acuerdo a sus conocimientos, destrezas y habilidades. SERVICIO AL CLIENTE Y CONTACTO Si quieres elaborar o actualizar el MOF en tu MIPYME, dejanos tus datos y te visitaremos en tu local para saber como podemos ayudarte. 0 vistas This site was designed with the.com website builder. Create your website today. Start Now.
Con el proposito de orientar y dar claridad al usuario del Manual, respecto a la organizacion y funcionamiento del Ministerio, se incluyen elementos administrativos relacionados con su vision, mision, principios, proposito, politicas y estrategias culturales y deportivas; asi tambien se describen los ambitos contenidos en el Plan Nacional de Desarrollo Cultural a Largo Plazo. El componente sustantivo del Manual lo constituye la descripcion de las funciones del Ministerio, asi como las especificas de las dependencias tecnicas y administrativas que integran su organizacion. Many thanks for sharing. Estamos para servirle. As a result, the web page can not be displayed. Cloudflare monitors for these errors and automatically investigates the cause. To help support the investigation, you can pull the corresponding error log from your web server and submit it our support team. Please include the Ray ID (which is at the bottom of this error page). Additional troubleshooting resources.
In recent years, plaintiffs in aircraft crash cases have been using subsequently issued changes to maintenance manuals or inspection programs to establish the standard of care with respect to aircraft ownership, operation and maintenance. Specifically, in a post-aircraft accident scenario, plaintiffs’ experts will scour the aircraft’s logbooks in an attempt to identify subsequently issued changes with which the aircraft owner, operator, or maintenance provider has not complied. They then try and argue a causal connection between that lack of compliance and the aircraft accident. They will direct attention to the “mandatory” nature of the issued changes, so designated by the manufacturer. Plaintiffs will also argue that deferred or rejected compliance improperly placed financial savings over safety. In response, the defense will argue that the aircraft is still safe without compliance with the changes, pointing out that the changes are not issued by the agency responsible for safety and certification of aircraft and aircraft components. After all, unless the FAA has issued an airworthiness directive based upon the manufacturer's changes or otherwise mandated compliance under some other operating rule; the FAA apparently does not deem the manufacturer’s recommendations to be necessary or mandatory to protect the public’s interest in aviation safety. So why should the aircraft owner, operator, or maintenance provider comply when the FAA doesn't think it is necessary or mandatory. And why should the owner or operator spend additional money for parts or maintenance that may or may not actually make the aircraft safer. The higher standard of care argued in the tort context has yet to be pre-empted by the regulatory standard of care established by the FARs. What Should You Do? So how should an aircraft owner or operator deal with subsequently issued changes to maintenance instructions or an inspection program.
This means making sure that you are aware of all applicable changes issued by the manufacturer. Next, you need to specifically identify, in writing, the maintenance instructions or inspection program that have been adopted for your aircraft: Is it current as of the date the aircraft's type certificate was issued or is it current as of some later date. Unfortunately, the Legal Interpretation doesn't provide any guidance in this regard. This is necessary to later prove the version of instructions or program with which you complied. Conclusion The Legal Interpretation appears to raise more questions than it answers. And, unfortunately, these questions will only be answered by further legal interpretations or by changes to the regulations. In the meantime, you need to be aware of the regulatory requirements of compliance, to the extent that it is possible given the existing confusion. You will also need to understand the costs and benefits of compliance from a tort perspective.The information should not be relied upon as advice to help youEach case is unique and must be analyzed by an. Find out why more than 6500 people have enrolled for Sofema Online. Choose your Diploma Program now at our Virtual Aviation Academy SAS LATEST NEWS UPDATE. The most comprehensive course dealing with Aviation Quality Assurance Root Cause understanding now AVAILABLE - Root Cause Analysis for Quality Assurance Practitioners SAS LATEST NEWS UPDATE.The definition of maintenance does not include the terms “rebuild” or “rebuilt”. Those functions are limited to the Design Approval Holder (DAH) (i.e., manufacturer) with Production Certificate (PC) approval using its approved design data.
If maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alteration are being performed on an aircraft, engine, propeller, or appliance, each person shall use the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the current manufacturer’s maintenance manual or Instructions for Continued Airworthiness prepared by the manufacturer, or other methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the FAA. The Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) enable persons authorized by the FAA to maintain the continued airworthiness of the product and approve the product for return to service. The manufacturer is also required to furnish the ICA to each owner of the product and then make it available to persons requiring its use.It is also important to understand that inspection is only one element of maintenance; its tasks are different from other elements of maintenance that may be required as a result of performing an inspection, such as parts replacement and repair. Please tell us what we can do to help you. You may think that this is such a complex and time-consuming task, but let me tell you that with the help of easy and simple regulation it does not create any burden for the engineer. All faults must be repaired before departure of the aircraft, except those specified in MEL or CDL. Let’s see the exact definition of maintenance, as per ICAO. Pre-flight inspection is a type of inspection carried out before flight to ensure that the aircraft is fit for the intended flight. The following documents are used to maintain the airworthiness of aircraft. Aircraft maintenance activity is divided into two categories i.e. line maintenance and base maintenance. Line Maintenance also includes the replacement of components such as engines and propellers. This can be accomplished by simple means. Equivalent to a CA Form 1 may be EASA Form ONE and FAA Form 8130-3. In that condition, the Error-capturing method should always be implemented to avoid errors during maintenance.
An independent inspection should ensure correct assembly, locking, and a sense of operation. In such a condition reinspection must be carried out. However appropriate maintenance of aircraft is not possible without Approved Aircraft Maintenance Program. An approved aircraft maintenance program is a list of all maintenance tasks and inspections that are required to be performed by an aircraft maintenance engineer (certifying staff) on an aircraft at a given interval. The intervals quoted in units of flight hours, flight cycles, or calendar time. Furthermore, an owner or operator’s maintenance program also takes into account any maintenance data containing information on scheduling for components. EDTO CMP Documents. MEL also complies with EDTO CMP Requirements. Always follow current and approved AFM. We aim to provide the best aircraft maintenance practices, technology, and aviation safety tips. The owner of the farm I work on is thinking of looking for an aircraft engine overhaul shop because he noticed the other day that the motor on his cropduster made a strange sound when he started it up. It seems like a good idea for the farm owner to think about hiring a reputable specialist to fix his aircraft so we can spray down the crops to make them as healthy as possible. When working on an aircraft or aircraft component you should always refer to the relevant aircraft maintenance manual or component manufacturer’s manual. You should also follow your company policy and the requirements of the National Aviation Authority. For health and safety at the workplace, you should follow the rules and guidelines specified by your company, equipment manufacturer and the National Safety Authority. No part of this site may be reproduced without our written permission. Try Google site search or help us improve by submitting your definition.
This chapter is an overview of the current experience in aircraft maintenance programs, including inspection and repair processes, lessons learned from aging aircraft, and future needs to support new materials and structural concepts. New materials or structures, for which experience is limited, are observed more frequently until a basic level of confidence is established. Time extensions to inspection intervals are based on observations made during routine service checks. A typical airline maintenance and service plan is outlined in table 7-1. The objectives of an effective maintenance program are as follows (Edwards, 1994): Generally, the maintenance task evaluates sources of structural deterioration including accidental damage, environmental deterioration, and fatigue damage; susceptibility of the structure to each source of deterioration; the consequences of structural deterioration to continuing airworthiness including effect on aircraft (e.g., loss of function and reduction of residual strength, multiple-site or multiple-element fatigue damage, the effect on aircraft flight or response characteristics caused by the interaction of structural damage or failure with systems or power plant items, or in-flight loss of structural items); and the applicability and effectiveness of various methods of detecting structural deterioration, taking into account inspection thresholds and repeat intervals. Airline experience indicates that hardware items wear out, but statistical old-age wear-out in complex mechanical, electrical, and avionic components is not a dominant pattern of failure. In fact, over 90 percent of generic part types show either random distribution of failure or gradually increasing probability of failure with age (Edwards, 1994).
Hence, it is generally accepted that (1) good maintenance allows parts to reach their potential reliability; (2) overmaintaining does not improve reliability, but does waste money; and (3) undermaintaining can degrade reliability. In general, fundamental design changes are required to correct inherent component reliability problems. The first method, hard time, involves removing a unit from service when it reaches a pre-ordained parameter value. The third method, functional verification, requires performing an operational check of hardware function(s) to determine each function's availability if it is normally hidden from the scrutiny of the flight and operating crew. Such parts require routine performance or reliability Aircraft is dismantled, repaired, and rebuilt. Aircraft is repainted as needed Modern aircraft are more tolerant of failures than older aircraft designs because of the increased redundancy provided in the design. Damage may occur due to flight loads, thermal and environmental cycles, and aircraft operation and servicing activities. A number of valuable lessons have been learned from These lessons provide evaluation criteria in the application and servicing of new materials and structures. These areas are especially prone to damage and require robust material performance in these locations. Of the 2,241 incidents reported, more than a third were from unknown causes. A tabulation of the causes of damage is given in table 7-2. The repair of a damaged component is only part of the cost. The airline also bears the cost of flight delay or cancellation and the effects on connections and aircraft rotations. The failure resulted from multiple-site damage (MSD) and corrosion. In this case, MSD was the link-up of The accident focused international attention on the problems of operating an aging commercial fleet. If current usage and replacement trends continue, the number of aircraft over 20 years old will double by the year 2000.
Currently some 3,200 aircraft are affected by FAA Airworthiness Directives that concern operation and maintenance of the aging fleet. The review of experience with aging aircraft has caused an increase in the emphasis on stress corrosion, corrosion, fatigue, and MSD issues. This experience has caused, in turn, the selection of new aircraft alloys with better constituent chemistry control or changes in heat treatment tempers. Also, it has stimulated the development of new organic finishes that significantly retard corrosion, as well as the implementation of design practices to vastly improve corrosion resistance. Each agency developed a program consistent with its mission. The FAA's National Aging Aircraft Research Program addresses the aging aircraft structural safety concerns and provides certification authorities and operators with the tools to meet those concerns. NASA's Airframe Structural Integrity Program is focused on developing advanced integrated technologies to economically inspect for damage and to analytically predict the residual strength of older airplanes. Together these programs form the technological basis for a cooperative effort with U.S. industry to address the critical aging aircraft issues. If cracks emanate from adjacent fastener holes, they have the potential to link up and lead to unexpected catastrophic failures as described in the previous section. Also, even without link-up, multiple-site cracks can severely degrade the capability of the structure to withstand major damage from other discrete sources as is described later in this section. Various levels of inspections ranging from daily walk-around inspections to detailed tear-down inspections were performed. Instrumented nondestructive evaluation (NDE) methods such as eddy current probes were used only to inspect local regions of the structure where previous cracking problems had occurred.
While these inspection methods were labor intensive and highly subjective, they were acceptable because the airframe was designed to survive a two-bay skin crack with a severed frame or stiffener. This design criterion was established to enable the airplane to tolerate major discrete source damage (i.e., such as might be encountered as a result of an engine structural failure) as well as large cracks resulting from the link up of smaller fatigue cracks or the unstable propagation of manufacturing flaws or other service-induced damage. Such damage is large enough that it should be easily detected, and the operator does not need to search for small cracks to ensure the structural integrity of the airframe. Design residual strength requirements were based on this assumption. However, the existence of very small cracks (e.g., a few hundredths of an inch or tenths of a millimeter in length) in the adjacent structure can severely degrade this residual strength and thus jeopardize the safety of the airplane as it did in the Aloha Airlines incident. Therefore, inspection of aging aircraft has become much more onerous than for newer aircraft because safety is vitally dependent on the detection of the very small cracks associated with this onset of MSD. This represents a major challenge to the inspection and aircraft industries. NDE methods related to MSD are described in chapter 8, and fracture mechanics and structural analysis methods are described in chapter 6. While other aging mechanisms, such as wear and fatigue, are somewhat predictable and can be addressed by the airline maintenance programs to preclude major structural problems, corrosion—especially in its localized forms—is very difficult to predict and detect. Factors that influence the extent of corrosion on aircraft are materials selection, design, component processing and finishing, operational environments, and maintenance programs.
Clearly, maintenance Consequently, the degree of corrosion protection incorporated into the airplane varies from limited protection for older aircraft to fairly extensive protection for newer aircraft. Corrosion control programs are tailored to individual fleets, depending on age, prior experience, flight environment and degrees of corrosion protection incorporated prior to the delivery of the aircraft (DeRosa, 1995). All protective finishes are maintained and corrosion prevention compounds are applied during periodic maintenance. Critical areas that are prone to excessive corrosion include areas below the galleys, doorways, lavatories, cargo compartment subfloors, inside external fairings, and the bilges which are all treated at four-year intervals. Landing gear wheel wells and wing spars are treated yearly. Longer intervals of time are allowed between reapplications of corrosion prevention compounds in the case of less-severe environments. Based on service experience, the airlines have expectations that manufacturers of new aircraft will (DeRosa, 1995): Because new materials and fabrication processes may yield different degradation and damage mechanisms, a preproduction review should ensure that the new aircraft design includes lessons learned from the existing aging fleet. Most of these steps have now been incorporated into recent aircraft designs. The susceptibility of aircraft to corrosion and MSD fatigue can be reduced by the following steps: Materials selection in wet areas, the design drainage schemes, the use of insulation standoffs, and sealing and finishing systems have all been improved. The benefits of these improvements should be evident during in-service performance of the Boeing 777 and future aircraft. Liberal use of corrosion-preventive compounds applied in the aircraft assembly process and periodically in service, using a good corrosion control maintenance program, should minimize future corrosion concerns.
For these applications, honeycomb sandwich designs with thin 0.6—1.5 mm (0.024—0.060 in.) composite facesheets are most common. It follows that most of the experience with advanced composites has been obtained with this kind of construction. Previously, similar constructions with fiberglass skins and nonmetallic honeycomb core have been used. There is much less service experience with thicker-skin laminate designs that have been used in composite primary structure. In addition to groundhandling damage, a recent survey by the International Air Transport Association, summarized in table 7-3, lists the particular causes of damage that occur in the current generations of composite structure (IATA, 1991). An especially difficult maintenance issue resulting from these types of damage is when perforation allows the incursion of hydraulic fluids, water, and other liquids into the honeycomb core. Composites may also suffer loss of load-bearing capability due to resin charring and the potential for corrosion of adjacent metallic surfaces. Typical causes of composite service damage mechanisms are shown in table 7-4. Occasionally, temporary or permanent repairs can be performed by bonding or bolting a sealantcoated metal or precured composite overlay over the damage. Finally, most permanent repairs are accomplished with room-temperature curing, wet lay-up and precured patch techniques. Other permanent repairs use prepreg that cures under vacuum or autoclave pressures at temperatures lower than the cure temperature of the original structure. Repair resins are being developed that have relatively low cure temperatures, Thin facesheets on honeycomb panels are currently repaired using bonded scarf patches with a scarf taper of 20:1. For thicker constructions the result would be the removal of a large amount of undamaged material (Bodine et al., 1994).
The emphasis in the development of primary structure repairs has therefore been on fastened, precured composite or metallic splice plates, similar to current metal repair techniques. A design for a fairly complex bolted repair is shown in figure 7-2. The issues that must be addressed in these types of repairs include (1) criteria for determining when repairs are required; (2) availability of standardized repair elements; (3) drilled hole quality; (4) ability to restore original strength, durability, and damage tolerance; and (4) ability to match existing contours. Repairs carried out during an overnight stop (at line stations or hubs) and repairs requiring more-intensive maintenance center rework should follow guidelines established by the manufacturer's structural repair manual and the appropriate industry group, the Commercial Aircraft Composite Repair Committee. Accordingly, there is a pressing need for standardization of repair materials and processes. Maintainable designs need to consider component accessibility, permitted defect levels, and nondestructive testing The durability of protective finish systems (including aerodynamic surfaces) should be characterized prior to production. Since chemical strippers attack the polymer matrix, airlines generally remove finishes through mechanical abrasion processes. New paint removal processes like laser, heat, frozen carbon dioxide blasting, and wheat starch blasting are being evaluated. Rapid, low-cost, on-aircraft paint removal techniques require implementation if larger areas of composite surfaces are to be accepted on the next-generation aircraft. This would include development of repair materials, tooling, and processes for high-modulus, high-strength composite skins, metallic and nonmetallic honeycomb sandwich structure, and laminated hybrid and bonded metal structures.