The Plant Maintenance Program

Article extract from ReliabilityWeb newsletter:
http://reliabilityweb.com/articles/entry/the_plant_maintenance_program/

The program explains and prescribes what personnel do and who does what, how, when and why? The personnel involved are more than those in maintenance. They also include all who support maintenance, such as warehousing, or depend on maintenance services, as with production.

The success of all maintenance functions is enhanced with a program commonly understood across the entire operation. But, the most important aspect of all is to ensure that those other departments that must support maintenance or utilize its services know how. If they don’t know what maintenance wants and needs, they cannot deliver it. There is an axiom that suggests: If you want someone’s help, you must first tell them how they can help. More simply: No tell; no help.

Maintenance is not a stand-alone effort. Any successful effort to improve maintenance performance, regardless of how, depends on the quality of the plant maintenance program. It’s important to note that it is the plant maintenance program, not the maintenancedepartment’s maintenance program. Maintenance is a service provider, dependent for success on the cooperation and support of all other plant departments and the backing of a supportive plant manager. Maintenance is not to be carried out single-handedly by maintenance. Planning, for example, is a key maintenance function and the responsibility for successful planning rests solely with maintenance. But, the planning function requires the support of numerous plant departments, like warehousing, purchasing, shops, accounting, etc. Few maintenance functions are successful without help and cooperation from other departments.

Getting Started

Only the plant manager controls all departments. Therefore, the existence of a quality plant maintenance program is the responsibility of the plant manager. However, the maintenance manager is responsible for the effective execution of the elements of the plant maintenance program. Yet, the maintenance manager depends on all other departments in order to execute the plant maintenance program. Thus, the plant manager becomes responsible for ensuring the support and cooperation of other departments, which, in turn, ensure the success of maintenance. What must the plant manager do? Based on the corporate business strategy, the plant manager, as shown in Figure 1, develops a business plan (1), assigns departmental objectives specifying responsibilities for primary operational or support activities to include interactions with maintenance (2) and specifies policies for the conduct of maintenance (3). In turn, departments acknowledge objectives and follow policies as they incorporate all experiences with merit (4) and follow principles (5) to develop internal and interdepartmental procedures (6). Procedures are then incorporated into departmental programs (7) and information systems utilized to control actions (8). Once tested, departments organize to support programs (9) and interact according to approved program details (10). Thereafter, information is used to control and manage the overall operation (11).

It follows that the best maintenance organization must be capable of executing the what, who, how, when and why of the plant maintenance program. And the best information system is the one that provides the right information to ensure efficient execution of the what, who, how, etc., specified in the program. It is reasonable to state that modern strategies, like reliability centered maintenance (RCM), cannot be successfully implemented unless there is a plant maintenance program, organization and information system to support them. It logically follows that only when a plant and its maintenance department have solidly locked down what they do, how, etc., can they confidently choose the best organization and a competent information system to carry out and control plant maintenance activities.

Figure 1

Program Development

Program definition begins at the plant manager level. This individual states how the departments should work together efficiently and productively by assigning specific objectives. The plant manager provides policies so departments are guided as they develop internal and interdepartmental procedures that make the plant’s maintenance program work efficiently.

Effective maintenance and actions that assure reliable equipment and workforce productivity don’t simply happen! They happen only after clear, logical management guidance is provided and a quality program emerges.

Program definition is a composite interaction of all departments. As they work together, maintenance crews, equipment operators, supervisors and staff personnel, like planners, warehouse personnel, or purchasing agents, should confer as the procedures for each department are being developed and interdepartmental actions confirmed. This collaboration better assures the practicality and workability of the final program.

Program education is essential and must include everyone in the plant, from worker to manager. Plant managers should make a special effort to observe the discussion between departments as they commit to procedures necessary to carry out the plant’s business plan. Questions should be answered promptly and correctly. Recommendations should be welcomed and encouraged.

Program Definition Techniques

The most effective technique for documenting the program is a schematic diagram that depicts the interaction between individuals of participating departments. The schematic is accompanied by a legend to aid understanding of the step-by-step process. While other techniques, such as flow charts, decision trees, or narratives, with diagrams might be used, none are as effective as the schematic diagram in showing people’s interactions. The schematic pinpoints ‘you’ and ‘me.’ It describes directly what ‘we’ must do, how ‘we’ will do it and the results ‘we’ should achieve. It is this ‘personal’ explanation that helps to bind people to the program.

As Figure 2 illustrates, preventive maintenance (PM) services due are shown by the information system (1). Services on equipment due (2) are either static (require shutdown) or dynamic (done while running). Static services are integrated into the weekly schedule and operations is advised of the approved, scheduled shutdown times (3). Dynamic PM services are done at the discretion of the maintenance supervisor (4). The maintenance supervisor assigns PM services to individual crew members (5). Services are performed by maintenance crew members (6) and crew members confer with operators to learn about actual equipment condition (7). Operators assist according to their instructions (8), while operations supervisors are advised of new deficiencies by the crew member (9). Deficiencies are then reviewed by the maintenance supervisor and the crew member (10) and converted into work as follows: Emergency repairs - Supervisor assigns at first opportunity (11); Work that meets planning criteria requiring planning - Supervisor forwards to planner (12); and Unscheduled repairs - Crew member enters them into the work order system as new work to be fitted in at first opportunity (13).

Figure 2

Conclusion

It is always prudent to ensure that everyone in an industrial organization understands their operational, support and cooperative roles and responsibilities. When this happens, the plant maintenance effort will be successful.

Paul D. Tomlingson, retired, is a 44 year veteran maintenance management consultant focusing on heavy industry. Mr. Tomlingson is the author of eleven textbooks and over a hundred published trade journal articles. He is a graduate of West Point and received a BA in Government and a MBA from the University of New Hampshire.

Achieving Total Productive Maintenance without Supervisors

Article extract from ReliablePlant newsletter:
http://www.reliableplant.com/Read/29051/maintenance-without-supervisors

Several years ago I visited a state-of-the-art power plant that had a net generation of 260 megawatts, which is enough electricity to serve 75,000 homes. I was there for an executive meeting of the Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals, which included presentations about this unique plant and its workforce.

It was a green plant in more ways than one. The technology was designed with “green” in mind, and it was a new plant with all of the potential that comes with that. The result was a world-class example of total productive maintenance (TPM).

The opportunity with the most risk was the marriage of maintenance and operations. This was to be a very intense front-end workload with major operating cost impacts. For example, there were 55 craftsmen comprising five 11-person supervisor-less teams on rotating shifts, with the rotated-out team devoted to planning and project type work.

The unique part was that all were experienced craftsmen in performing the required maintenance activities as well as plant operations. There were two managers: a plant manager and a maintenance manager. Every three weeks, corresponding to the shift rotation, they traded places.

During the process of planning for the plant and its operation, management decided to do away with supervisors, planners, maintenance engineers and schedulers. Could not the maintenance/operators perform these activities? Well, yes, if it was laid out and appropriate training was provided to all concerned. It was decided that all of the functions of a world-class operation would be present and active, however resident within each team.

There were approximately 20 people interviewed for each position. Most unsuccessful applicants were uncertain about self-directed teams. After the first employees were selected, they and following hires would make up the interviewing teams. The position requirements included:

• The employee was a journeyman in a technical craft
• Had a willingness to work in a team-empowered environment
• Be cross-trained to be multi-skilled
• Be trained on and support world-class maintenance principles
• Be trained and willing to operate the plant equipment
• Be willing to do whatever the shift required in concert with the other 10 team members.

Work-order planning and within-shift scheduling would come from within the team. Training coincided with the plant construction, taking advantage of the contractors and equipment vendors participating in installations, while simultaneously developing preventive, predictive and corrective maintenance procedures.

Extensive training also covered the soft skills required for self-managed work teams and working in this open environment. All administrative, planning and estimating, preventive and overhaul, operating, performance evaluation, stockroom, and maintenance engineering procedures were developed by the team members with guidance from the two managers, the plant technical staff and company employees from other plants. The 55 craftsmen owned the operation of this generating facility.

A computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) was specified by the teams, and world-class estimating, planning and scheduling were loaded into the system. Preventive maintenance (PM) tasks were assigned to the four shifts, and the rotating teams did not change this basic schedule unless it was agreed across teams. Each team developed expertise within itself for estimating and planning work orders along with analysis of maintenance and operational performance.

Every three weeks, a member from each team would be chosen within the team as a shift representative through whom the other shifts communicated, and the managers would convey pertinent information. After a year, the two managers thought that maybe the representatives should be paid extra for this three-week term. To a man, the 55 craftsmen decided that management should take that additional money and divide it up to increase the hourly rate for all. "This is a team effort."

Over the two years the plant had been in operation, team members all attended additional outside training, some began college programs, and all participated in continuous evaluations of the preventive and predictive maintenance activities. The result was that the plant continued to see continuous improvement, proving that implementation of TPM is possible even without supervisors.

Build Processes that Drive Consistency

Article extract from ReliablePlant newsletter:
http://www.reliableplant.com/Read/29007/processes-drive-consistency

As I’ve gotten older, I have tried to curtail my consumption of fast food. I’m aware that the fat content, calorie counts and general nutrition levels are not the healthiest available. I know that as we age, we should watch our cholesterol, our weight and make sure that we eat healthy. I also know that my diet will directly contribute to the length and quality of my life. With all that being said, I love fast food. I am usually pretty good at keeping a balance of healthy eating and not-so-healthy eating, but sometimes I just want something that comes quickly and cheaply even though it may not be the best thing for me.

I recently decided to partake in some fast food in spite of the long-term potential health consequences. As I was standing in line reading the menu, I was watching the processes behind the counter. This particular restaurant was moving like a choreographed dance recital. It appeared that each person clearly understood his or her purpose and was executing flawlessly.

All too often, however, fast-food restaurants are rather hit or miss. You never know exactly what sort of food or service you may receive. In some cases, the employees move slowly, while in other cases, they may move quickly. Sometimes the food is hot and fresh, and sometimes not so much. Sometimes you get the feeling that the employees could not possibly care less about serving you, while others are courteous and concerned professionals.

One of the challenges of fast-food chains is to drive consistency. In fact, this is a key challenge in all businesses. Consistency will drive customers back to us, while inconsistency will drive them away. Whether we are serving cheeseburgers, small electronics or large engineered systems, our customers want us to be consistent. They want to know what to expect from us, and they want to know that they can count on us. They want us to do what we say, not surprise them, and deliver high-quality products and services. It is up to us to build long-term processes that drive consistency and build that confidence in our organizations.

So, if you have occasion to visit a fast-food establishment, or any restaurant for that matter, watch the processes if you can to see what they are doing. Try to see where things are located, how they are marked and how each process is defined. See if there is something you can learn from your favorite eatery — especially if they are good at value delivery.

Streamline Your Maintenance Operation for Optimum Performance

Article extract from ReliaPlant newsletter:
http://www.reliableplant.com/Read/28975/streamline-maintenance-operation

If your backlog is piling up or you feel like you don’t have enough resources in terms of labor and parts, it may be time to work toward lean maintenance.

Lean maintenance is the application of lean philosophies, methods, tools and techniques to maintenance functions. It has the fundamental goals of eliminating waste associated with labor, inventory, procedures and techniques, resulting in improved productivity and reduced costs.

Lean maintenance does not imply a slash and dash approach to cutting costs and jobs. This common method will not reduce waste or lower costs. Instead, lean maintenance philosophy decreases costs by getting rid of waste that can be defined as “anything that doesn’t add value to the maintenance process or service.”

Following are a few areas where wastefulness and sluggishness can crop up in the maintenance department.

Overproduction

Overproduction in the maintenance environment means doing any work that does not add value. Examples include performing preventive and predictive maintenance tasks more often than is necessary and redoing jobs that were not done correctly the first time.

Waiting

Areas of waste in this category include maintenance personnel waiting for equipment availability, job assignments, tools, parts, instructions, other crafts, permit approval, etc. Waiting is not a value-added activity and should be eliminated or reduced as much as possible.

Transportation

Unnecessary travel is the result of ineffective planning and scheduling. This could involve a trip to the maintenance shop to get technical information or to the storeroom for parts and tools. Poorly designed preventive maintenance (PM) routes are also a major contributor.

Process Waste

When performing a breakdown repair, maintenance personnel are typically under a lot of pressure to fix the equipment as quickly as possible and often are not given enough time to fix the equipment properly. This results in a poor repair and a recurring problem. Properly performed repairs can eliminate this process waste.

Most organizations now use some sort of computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) or enterprise asset management (EAM). Process waste also occurs when inefficiencies exist in these systems. For example, a poorly designed system may call for multiple entries of the same data, or a material requisitioning process could require redundant approvals.

Defects

In maintenance, a defect can be defined as leaving an asset in an unreliable condition. There are many causes of defects in the maintenance environment. Defects due to poor workmanship arise from insufficient training, inadequate/outdated procedures and not having the proper tools to do the job.

Spare Parts Inventory

Most storerooms contain a significant amount of obsolete inventory. This ties up capital and consumes management resources. It can easily amount to 10 to 20 percent of annual inventory dollars. Keep in mind that excess inventory is not obsolete but is inventory maintained at unnecessarily high levels. Excess inventory also ties up capital and consumes management resources. In addition, inadequate PM programs cause equipment failures, which in turn results in the need for more parts (consuming working capital) and downtime.

A CMMS/EAM can monitor and control a spare parts inventory. It will keep track of inventory items, vendor performance, parts receipts, issues and returns. In addition, a CMMS/EAM can automate the parts purchasing process. Vendor managed and stocked inventory can also drastically reduce the parts quantity in the storeroom and save money.

While breakdowns and failures are never planned, they can cause the loss of productivity and money. Finding the root cause of a failure provides an organization with a solvable problem. Once the root cause is identified, a fix can be developed and implemented, preventing a recurring failure situation.

About the Author

Kris Bagadia is the president of PEAK Industrial Solutions in Brookfield, Wis. A longtime consultant and educator, he can be reached by e-mail at krisb@peakis.com or viawww.cmmsmadeeasy.com.

About the Author

Kris Bagadia

Kris Bagadia is the founder and president of PEAK Industrial Solutions. He has experience in all facets of the maintenance management process and has stayed at the forefront of CMMS/EAM technology ... Read More

Standard Work Drives Continuous Improvement

Article extract from ReliaPlant newsletter:
http://www.reliableplant.com/Read/28949/standard-work-improvement

If you were to ask an operator or even some leaders what standard work meant to them, you might get responses such as “standard operating procedures,” “work instructions” or “check sheets.” These are all legitimately correct answers. What you might not get is that standard work is the basis for driving all continuous improvement actions.

“Where there is no standard, there can be no kaizen.” — Taiichi Ohno

This statement is often ignored as companies work to improve their performance. The initial attempt to quickly resolve issues so that the team can see action being taken may result in the essential element of continuous improvement – root cause analysis—being overlooked.

An important part of truly understanding the relationship of variables on a process comes from stabilizing the effects of changes made to improve it. Traditionally, one may view the lack of this understanding in Figure 1 below.

The intent here is to quickly take care of issues by putting into action what we believe to be the fixes necessary to the process. This type of “fire-fighting” usually results in busy activities that may not be truly focused on the larger root causes apparent in the process.

Applying standard work to the process and understanding the effect of the changes will allow better learning for the operators and leaders. The effect of this method is presented in Figure 2 below.

The critical component in this effort is using tools such as a fishbone diagram or creating a Pareto chart to detail and quantify the issues. The diligence and discipline of executing this is necessary for acceptance and use in your discovery of root cause analysis. At times the activity may be painful to start, but the benefits in learning by all will certainly outweigh the costs and will be welcomed and expected by everyone.

The key is to understand the important variables you wish to measure. As you stabilize and improve your process, you will understand the barriers that had traditionally kept you from meeting your expectations. Remember, as Taiichi Ohno pointed out, “Where there is no standard, there can be no kaizen.”

Best Ways to Prevent Equipment Problems

Article extract from MachineryLubrication newsletter:
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/30560/prevent-equipment-problems

Preventive maintenance methods are often promoted but rarely put into practice. This article will attempt to encourage a paradigm shift in maintenance thinking with prevention driving most of the activities. The main thrust will be on leadership and not 
simply management.


Leadership vs. Management


The classic definition of management is to do things right. The definition of leadership is to do the right things. The difference may be subtle but very important. How often have you witnessed someone planning a repair job to be completed within an allotted timeframe when no one was asking why this repair needed to be made so frequently? 


A manager attempts to get work done on time, while a leader attempts to minimize or eliminate the required work. A manager continually asks for more people, while a leader tries to maximize the effectiveness of his or her staff. A manager tackles problems as they arrive, while a leader asks why continual problems are tolerated.


Prevention Depends 
on Leadership


Without proper leadership, problem prevention is very difficult to achieve. The following case studies illustrate a variety of situations in which preventive techniques were used effectively in a typical mill environment.


A Poorly Designed 
Hydraulic System 


In this mill, steel slabs issuing from a caster started as a long, continuous hot metal strand. A torch cutter sliced off 30-foot slabs from the front end as the strand moved at a slow pace. The slabs were lifted off the table rolls and stacked for delivery to a storage yard by a carrier. The tongs resembled two pairs of giant 10-foot scissors operated by hydraulic cylinders and fed by a hydraulic system mounted near the top of the scissor arms. The system had a vertical tank with a pump mounted beside it. Due to space limitations, the valves, tubing and hoses were located directly over the pump and motor, making for a very congested design. The entire assembly hung from a crane. When an O-ring blew or a valve needed changing, quite a bit of disassembly was required to access the bad part. A lot of time was also wasted with repairs on this equipment due to the design.


The cause of the problem was obvious, and only a redesign would suffice. The supplier of the tongs was contacted and told the system design was inadequate. With “manifolding” technology, much of the pipe, tubing and hoses could be eliminated as well as the congestion in the confined spaces. The supplier agreed to redesign this part of the system, which solved the problem. This case exemplified a unique issue where only prevention of future problems would suffice. Learning to live with the problem was not an option.

Inefficient Purchasing 
of Lubricants


At this particular company, lubricants and hydraulic fluids were purchased by individual departments with no coordination between them. Consequently, the number of brands proliferated, increasing the chances of duplication. Products were procured by brand name, and the purchasing department had no choice but to buy what was requested. Because lubricants were purchased by brand name with no competition, suspicions arose that prices might be excessive. When a problem arose, quality was blamed and another supplier was brought in to solve it.


It was suspected that the company was living with a problem that could be resolved. Because ASTM and other test methods could help determine product quality, a committee was formed to decide how to purchase lubricants based on these tests. A strategy was soon developed. All products would be tested for important parameters to uncover duplicates. Products would be separated by categories such as petroleum hydraulic fluids, fire-resistant hydraulic fluids, general-purpose greases, electric-motor bearing greases, petroleum turbine oils, gear oils, anti-friction bearing oils, petroleum circulating oils and synthetic oils.


Specifications were also written for each lubricant type based on the test results of the higher grades in each category. Every specification was assigned a unique number, and equipment throughout the plant was tagged with the number of the product it was 
to receive.


The specifications were sent out for bids from various suppliers. The lowest bidder was awarded the business for one year. The prices received were markedly lower than the comparable branded products.


After the initial groundwork was completed, the system began to function well. The inventory shrank because so many locations used the same products. Purchasing in bulk became possible due to consolidation, which also resulted in a reduction in drums and costs. Samples of incoming products were taken periodically to ensure quality. Gradually, the overall quality improved. 


The goal of the system was to purchase high-quality products at the least possible cost and to eliminate as many empty drums as possible. Mistakes related to applying the wrong lubricant were also reduced. Once the system was in place, it took very little time to maintain it. 


This was an example of a plant living with a problem that not many thought was a problem. It was only after some penetrating questions were asked that most were convinced that there might be a better way of doing things. How the plant was purchasing lubricants was costing much more than necessary both in dollars and in manpower.


Short Motor Bearing Life


In this hot mill, as the steel strand issues from the last finishing stand, a long series of rolls conveys it at high speed to the coilers. Each roll is individually driven by an electric motor. Water cascades down from sprays to cool the strip as it speeds toward the coilers. Despite elaborate splash guards, it is almost impossible to keep water off the motor shafts. The shaft seals were not adequate to keep water out of the motors, and trying different seal designs did not help. The motor repair shop could barely keep up with all the failures. Finally, a seal company recommended adding flingers on the shaft. These consisted of a rubber device that looked much like a shaft seal but with a hole in the center slightly smaller than the shaft diameter. As a motor was repaired and ready to ship, the repairman would slip a flinger onto the shaft up to the housing. When the motor was installed in this wet environment, any water that migrated toward the seal area would be flung off due to the rotating flinger. In this way, water could not get to the seal. Motor bearing life increased tremendously. In this instance, a serious problem was prevented with a simple device but only after someone asked why this was being tolerated.


Frequent Servo-valve Repairs


As steel mill technology improved, more and more servo valves were being used on the mill’s hydraulic systems to gain precision. Because of dirt sensitivity, systems with servo valves must be filtered to extreme cleanliness. Despite great efforts, servo-valve losses were becoming excessive at the mill. Costs were also high since the repairs could not be done in-house. 


To prevent these failures, a non-bypass duplex filter separated by a three-way valve with an electrical alarm was installed ahead of each valve. The filters had a cleanliness level of 1 to 2 microns. When the alarm sounded, maintenance personnel knew they had only a few minutes to switch the three-way valve to the clean side before a shutdown occurred. A clean filter element was always on standby. The result was that the servo-valve failures virtually ceased.


Once again, a simple design change prevented a serious problem. However, the difference with the servo-valve issue was that production was being affected as well as repair costs.

Excessive Oil Losses


Oil losses were becoming excessive in the mill’s hydraulic and lubrication systems. The millwrights dutifully kept the systems filled and operating but did not report all the oil additions as they were made. When additions were reported, there was no good method for determining the amount. Therefore, it was difficult to establish where the bad leaks were and to schedule repairs. Prevention or reduction of these oil losses was the goal, but they could only be attacked when they occurred.


The decision was made to mount small water meters on the fill lines to each system. These meters had some internal friction, but since the oil was being pumped in as makeup oil, the pressure required was adequate. In cases where the oil flowed by gravity from an upper to a lower floor, low-friction meters were required. Each day, an inspector read the meters to determine if any leaks had gone unreported. If so, action was taken. This was an example of taking preventive action (reading the meters) to prevent further losses. No action could be taken without proper information supplied by the meters.


Rapid Motor Burnouts


The plant’s coke oven doors are approximately 20 feet tall and 4 feet wide. They are made of steel, lined with firebrick and weigh about 1,000 pounds. Each is mounted vertically on each end of the oven and must be lifted off by a huge machine so the red-hot coke can be pushed out. The doors are held in place by two steel arms that are rotated into place behind vertical “buckstays.” In the center of the arms is a hexagonal nut that is 5 inches in diameter. The arms are rotated by a large socket that fits the hexagonal nut and is operated by a motor and gear reducer mounted on the machine. The arms often become wedged behind the buckstays, so an electrician must hold in the overload relays to get the motor to turn. Frequent motor burnouts were attributed to this practice. 


Rather than increase the size of the motors, the decision was made to convert the operation to hydraulic motors due to the inherent overload protection in such a system. Relief-valve adjustment serves this purpose.


Because of the large amount of dirt inherent in the coke plant and the dirt sensitivity of the hydraulic motors, the hydraulic systems were redesigned. This redesign was so successful that no hydraulic motor failures occurred for the first five years. The improved cleanliness also increased pump life. This case was an example of prevention involving a radical design change with which not everyone agreed.


Unchecked Oil Temperatures


At another hot mill in the Pittsburgh area, the challenge was determining the cause of losing several back-up bearings. It seemed to be a case of the oil overheating, but when the coolers were examined, none of the thermometers was working. It also appeared that no one was checking the key system parameters, such as temperature, water content, flow, tank levels and cleanliness. 


When the thermometers were replaced, oil temperatures of 175 degrees F were observed. Evidently, the coolers were having no effect. Once the coolers were replaced, the problem ceased. 


This was a case of not paying attention to signs that can warn of impending problems. Management hastily instituted a form to be completed on each shift that forced someone to watch those important system parameters. 


Misreported Oil Demulsibility 


Oil purchased for the mill’s back-up bearing system needed to be able to drop out water quickly. The purchasing specifications gave a very strict number that had to be obtained from the ASTM D-2711 test. ASTM D-1401 is another test for demulsibility, but it is used for light oils. The heavier oils utilized for these back-up bearings had to be tested with the former test, although it took much longer than the ASTM D-1401 test. 


The mill was experiencing a rise in water levels with samples tested from new loads of oil. Samples taken from in-service oil were having the same problem. Under normal conditions, the water levels should have remained under 5 percent but were now 20 percent. The lab assured the mill that the samples of new oil were within the specification. This situation continued for several months as an investigation was conducted. There were concerns that back-up losses would soon begin rising. 


As luck would have it, the lab shut down, which meant the mill had to find another one. When the next sample was sent to the new lab, the mill immediately received a call that the demulsibility was below specification. The load had been pumped out and replaced with a load from another company. It turned out that the old lab had been using the ASTM D-1401 test because it was quicker than the D-2711 test but did not inform the mill. The oil supplier didn’t even have the equipment to perform the D-2711 test but was relying on its additive supplier to provide the percentage to use. This was a case of having all the needed tools in place but still getting bad information.


Three Phases of Prevention


These case studies encompass preventive actions for three types of situations: an obvious situation, a change of methods situation and an unseen situation. Each of these is described below.


An Obvious Situation


These situations are like the poorly designed hydraulic system or the electric motor bearing issue. The problem is very costly, and the solution is either obvious or requires a design change. The solution will also require time, money and the will to do it. Most agree that solving the problem is worth a try since it is easily seen. These situations are usually designated as “crises.” The alternative is to learn to live with the problem.


A Change of Methods Situation


These situations involve a long-standing way of doing things, such as each department buying lubricants with no attempt at consolidation or not reporting system fluid additions. Although the problems are seen, not everyone envisions a solution or agrees one is needed. Personnel have learned to live with the problem. Basically, the way things are done must be changed.


An “Unseen” Situation


Many times actions can be taken to prevent bad things from happening. These include condition monitoring, regular inspections, close monitoring of system gauges and oil sampling for laboratory tests. Every plant system has parameters that must be checked periodically. These checks consist of people making an assessment of the condition and filing accurate reports. When these people do their jobs correctly, bad things are prevented. 


Short-sighted managers only “see” the people who repair things. Those focused on prevention work in a less dramatic environment. Consequently, when the economy is poor, these jobs often are eliminated. 


Leaders not only must ensure the “seen” is handled efficiently but also that the “unseen” is not neglected. The “unseen” typically requires recognizing the indications of bad things about to happen, which can often be identified in regular inspections by sight, feel, smell or hearing. However, most of the “unseen” must be detected by equipment. This would include temperature, vibration, sound and lab tests. 


The “unseen” also involves a conviction that technology can be used to predict events in order to avoid or plan for them. This conviction is an important leadership attribute. Remember, managers don’t see the “unseen,” but leaders do.

Machinery Lubrication (8/2016)

Maintenance, Reliability and Asset Management - What’s the Difference?

Over the last few years, we have seen a number of changes in our chosen field. For many years, maintenance was the term used for all stewardship of plant and equipment. Then reliability centered maintenance (RCM) started to take off and this saw the advent of reliability, or to be more correct, the term reliability. There was a plethora of job adverts, articles and presentations at conferences that included the term reliability. The strange thing was that in many cases, the content was no different than when it was called maintenance!

What did start to happen was a drift towards the separation of tasks that needed to be performed under plant and equipment stewardship. Whereas for many years it was the responsibility of maintenance to ensure the best availability by using tools, such as failure analysis, root cause analysis and cost analysis, to identify those areas requiring improvement and then enacting solutions, these things started to become the responsibility of the reliability group. To illustrate, there was one organization looking for 70 reliability engineers across their plants and when asked where they thought they would find these people (as there hadn’t been an increase in systematic or accredited training programs in reliability), the response was “probably from the maintenance department.” When asked what it was they would be doing, it turns out it would be many of those things maintenance manages have been doing for years. So for those of us who had been proactive and forward-thinking, there really wasn’t much new, but for those who had been stuck in the reactive mode, reliability was the way out. So to define maintenance in one word, it would be: FUNCTION.

Maintenance

The advent of reliability certainly heralded a change in one important respect. Organizations came to realize that there was a better way of doing things than simply reacting. The reliability banner seemed to allow more investment in finding solutions to plant and equipment problems. But one troubling thing at this time was that maintenance was quickly relegated to mean just fixing and doing, and for those of us who had been doing everything, that was now considered reliability. This was a little frustrating, if not insulting.

As with all changes, there were early adopters, some who held the belief that by adopting reliability, they would automatically get better. There was the search for the “silver bullet” and the “one stop solution,” but people began to find that reliability didn’t come without a great deal of effort. Some organizations started to use statistical modeling to help them with their approach and the term reliability started to become more common in those programs, which, although they helped promote reliability, sometimes they took away the need for thought and deep understanding of the issues. Unfortunately, there were still those who did very little different from when they called it maintenance and obviously they saw little improvement.

Those organizations that started to embrace reliability in its truest sense began to understand there was much more to reliability than simply doing maintenance. In fact, they found that maintenance didn’t even have the biggest influence on reliability. It came as a shock to find that when they carried out root cause analysis on their disruptions that maintenance was the root cause in a low percentage of cases. They were surprised to find that the inherent design had more influence and when they looked at the consequences of later changes to their process and production, they realized they were, in fact, inducing more failures. This also brought them to the realization that the operation of the equipment was as equally important as the maintenance of the equipment. They discovered that if they ran the equipment out of spec or above rated capability, they were reducing the lifecycle of the plant and equipment. There were organizations that took this to the depth of analysis, where they realized that simple process excursions were reducing the life of the plant and equipment; they understood that after many excursions, although the plant and equipment were returned to service, they were done so with a slightly less capability or life.

Reliability has taken hold of forums, conferences and the marketplace, and has been the focus over the last few years.

Reliability has taken hold of forums, conferences and the marketplace, and has been the focus over the last few years. Yet it still runs the gamut from doing the same as maintenance to having solid cross-functional reliability groups. Those organizations that have come to realize that if we had to define reliability in a word, it would be:OUTCOME.

Design, Maintain, Operate

Just when we thought it was safe to go back into the water, that we had an understanding of all things maintenance and reliability, IT happens. The IT being asset management. This is certainly the new kid on the block; for many years, the term asset management was the property of bankers and investment advisors, but sorry that is no longer the case.

In 2004 in the UK, a new standard appeared: PAS55. This standard was born out of several North Sea incidents and some large failures in UK infrastructures – water, hydro, railways – which had been owned and run by the government for many years, but had now been handed back to the private sector. There was concern that the new owners didn’t have a systematic way of managing the assets they acquired, so the Institute of Asset Management and the British Standards Institution developed a standard that would serve as a guide and model. This standard was known as Publicly Available Specification 55 or PAS55 for short. The utilities and others in the UK were required to conform to PAS55 and when electric utility companies apply to the government to increase their charged rates, they would have to demonstrate their compliance with PAS55 before it is allowed. This was the start of asset management as we are beginning to understand it today.

PAS55 was revised in 2008, but one year earlier in 2007, even though PAS55 had seen significant adoption by UK, Australian and European infrastructures, it was realized that it was still a British standard. With no global standard available, the seeds of ISO55000 were sown. So the question becomes, “What is asset management?” The quickest answer received from those working on the ISO standard was, “It’s not just managing assets!” In delving deeper, it was found that early adopters seem to be consistent in their belief in what asset management meant, whereas later adopters seemed to have adopted different slants, with some parts suddenly becoming the focus rather than the holistic approach described by the early adopters.

So what is asset management if it’s not just managing assets? Well, if we look at the definition of an asset in this context (ISO55000 definition): An asset is an item that has potential or actual value to a company. These assets may fall into different classes. They may tangible, which are the products you produce and the equipment you use, or intangible, which encompasses your reputation, image, social conscience, etc., or financial concerns, such as costs, investment and performance.

So from this definition, asset may or may not be a piece of equipment or a facility. Having just got our heads around the idea of viewing equipment not as equipment, but as a means of providing a function in RCM, we suddenly find we need to view it as a means of realizing value for the organization. To gain an understanding of what value means, we have to take a step back in the asset management process. At the very top of every organization are groups that will make demands of the organization. They may be customers, investors, shareholders, legislators and even the marketplace that the organization operates in. These demands, current and future, will be used to develop the organization’s strategic objectives, or how the organization will operate, where it wants to be in the marketplace and what represents value in this context. The strategic objectives and the defined value drive down though all aspects of the asset management process. In fact, the best definition of asset management may be the one that describes it as the means for enacting the strategic objectives or business plan.

Feeding out of the strategic objectives are the asset management strategy and the asset management policy, with the policy also feeding into the strategy. The policy describes the commitment of the organization to fulfill the strategic objectives and is similar in approach to the safety policy seen in facilities today. The strategy describes what and how it intends to attain based on the policy and strategic objectives, which introduces an important aspect of asset management – line of sight or alignment of purpose.

One of the goals of the asset management process is that everyone in the organization will be able to identify the reason and impact of what they do in relation to the strategic objectives.

One of the goals of the asset management process is that everyone in the organization will be able to identify the reason and impact of what they do in relation to the strategic objectives. The only way this is possible is if the thread is maintained through each level of the process. The strategy takes into account current and future demand and the ability of current assets to meet this demand so that any balancing, disposal, or investment of assets can be clearly planned. Coming out of the strategy, there needs to be a strategic plan that describes the framework that will deliver the strategy and include the constraints and criticality of costs, volumes, capabilities, etc.

This leads to the asset management plan, which gets more specific about the activities that will be carried out to meet the strategic plan. The asset management plan specifies how the management of the general infrastructure of physical assets will be carried out, with clear reference to levels of service, desired outcomes and finite time frame. It details any new investments, any disposal of assets, what level of operation and maintenance is expected, any combining of assets, and what training and education initiatives are required to meet the strategic plan.

Parallel to the asset management plan is the development of asset management systems, required to enable the process to flow to achieve strategic objectives. These asset management systems include strategies and systems to manage asset information, general data and knowledge management. These strategies and systems detail what is to be included, in what format, at what level and where it will be stored. This will ensure consistency and appropriateness of information that relates to the achievement of the strategic objectives. It will also guide the way information and knowledge is maintained through to the shop floor, again in demonstration of line of sight or alignment of purpose. This is the area where development of systems to ensure correct competencies, ongoing knowledge retention and behavioral norms takes place. Any changes to the organizational structure due to changes in demand or objectives is controlled through asset management systems, as well as ensuring the correct culture is in place to achieve the strategic objectives. An understanding of how an organization needs to behave to allow everyone to contribute to the strategic objectives is critical and will differ from organization to organization. However, if the line of sight or alignment of purpose is maintained, expectations and communications are clear, and all can believe that they in fact contribute, then they will form a solid foundation to build on.

The last part of the asset management process is risk management and performance review and improvement. Taking place here is ongoing risk analysis and performance management based on many criteria, ranging from environmental to operational to regulatory to sustainability to financial to organizational in the context of strategic objectives. The result and impact of these is fed directly back to all levels of the organization, up to the strategic objective level of the organization and into any specific asset management system that might be impacted, and so the process starts again.

You may notice one important part of the asset management process missing and that’s typically known as the useful life or lifecycle phase. That’s because there is not a great deal of difference to what was presented in the reliability section. We design, acquire, commission, maintain and operate using the same sort of tools and techniques. It is still important that the rights tools and techniques are used to ensure the reliability of the equipment. What has changed is the context in which these things are done – it’s done from the realization of value context. We may not simply keep maintaining and operating equipment to extend the life of an asset. We may decide that it is not really a value proposition and replace or dispose of it. Whatever we do, it is done in the context of providing value to the strategic objectives. We are able to do this because there is a clear line of sight from top to bottom. The other change is one that those who operate in the useful life phase will benefit from, as the design and impact of their efforts will be considered in many more parts of the organization and their influence will be far greater than it’s ever been.

This article was not meant to explain all the complexities that come with the change to asset management, rather it was meant to demonstrate that maintenance is not reliability or asset management. Maintenance is only part of reliability and reliability is not asset management, it is only part of asset management and asset management is more than managing assets. So to define asset management in one word is difficult, but a two-word definition is:OPERATING PHILOSOPHY.

---

Cliff Williams

Cliff Williams is a thirty year plus veteran of the maintenance field. He has worked in the pulp and paper and steel industries, as well as with food giants, such as Coca Cola, Kraft and Wrigley. He is a Green Belt in Six Sigma and a keen follower of the Lean Manufacturing world.

Keys for Testing Transformer Oils

Article extract from ReliaPlant newsletter:

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/29401/testing-transformer-oils

Transformer oils serve several functions. They provide dielectric strength, protect the solid insulation and facilitate heat transfer. Perhaps most importantly, they also offer a way to determine if a problem exists when looking inside the transformer.

34%	of lubrication professionals perform transformer oil analysis twice a year, based on a recent poll from machinerylubrication.com

While several different dielectric fluids are used in transformers today, by far the most common are mineral oils. Of these, the majority are of naphthenic base stocks. Generally speaking, naphthenics have a lower natural pour point and a lower viscosity index (VI). Obviously, the lower pour point is beneficial for the lower temperatures found in some climates and during the winter months.

Due to the lower viscosity index of naphthenic base oils, a rise in temperature has a greater effect on the viscosity of the oil. As the temperature increases, the viscosity decreases and the heat-transfer rate is improved. For oils of equal viscosity at 40 degrees C, the heat-transfer coefficient can be 8 to 11 percent greater for a naphthenic oil than for a paraffinic oil.

As a mineral oil, the transformer oil’s usable life can be optimized if it is kept clean, cool and dry. Upon receipt and prior to use, these oils should be tested for particulate and water contamination among others using the following tests: acid number (ASTM D664), dielectric breakdown voltage (ASTM D877), liquid power factor (ASTM D924-08), interfacial tension (ASTM D971), specific resistance (ASTM D1169), corrosive sulfur (ASTM D1275), visual examination (ASTM D1524), Karl Fischer water (ASTM D1533), dielectric breakdown voltage (ASTM D1816), gassing tendency (ASTM D2300), oxidation stability (ASTM D2440), gas chromatography (D3612), oxidation inhibitor (ASTM D4768 or D2668) and particle count (ASTM D6786). These tests will determine whether you are receiving clean oil and will establish a baseline of the oil properties that should be tested periodically. Although there are a number of tests to which the oils can be subjected, some are quite expensive, so they may be best used as diagnostic tests if an issue is indicated in more routine testing.

The recommended frequency of transformer oil analysis is dependent on both the voltage and power. The chart on the left can serve as a guideline but does not take into consideration the transformer’s operating environment.

If results from a periodic test raise a red flag, the frequency should be increased. Even if the cost of the tests is high, the expense should be compared with the cost of replacing a transformer and the downtime associated with the loss of a transformer.



The most common in-service tests are the dielectric breakdown voltage (ASTM D877), interfacial tension (ASTM D971), acid number (ASTM D664), oxidation inhibitor (ASTM D4768 or D2668), Karl Fischer water (ASTM D1533), visual examination (ASTM D1524), and dissolved gas analysis (ASTM D3612). The sampling for these tests is critical. Be sure to follow ASTM D923-07. Any deviation from this procedure may result in test data that does not offer an accurate picture of the condition of the oil or the internal components.

It is important to differentiate between normal and excessive gassing rates. These will vary based on the transformer design, insulation material and loading. It is recommended that laboratories use key gas analysis (KGA) supplemented by the Dornenburg and Rogers ratios in analyzing dissolved gas analysis (DGA) results. DGA measures the oil for methane, acetylene, ethylene, hydrogen, ethane and carbon monoxide. It can also provide an indication of arcing, corona, overheating oil and overheating cellulose.

Other tests that can be performed measure inorganic chlorides and sulfates (ASTM D878) and specific gravity (ASTM D1298). Some of these tests will be conducted by the blender or supplier. These tests will establish a baseline for comparison in future analysis.

Keep in mind that it is not uncommon for transformer oils to be in use for 30 years or more, so a little expense on the front end can lead to huge returns in the future.

Machinery Lubrication (6/2013)

About the Author

Loren Green

Expert Tips for Planning a CMMS Project

Article extract from ReliaPlant newsletter:
http://www.reliableplant.com/Read/28932/planning-cmms-project

A well-planned and executed computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) project can yield a maximum return on your investment. This return is realized through increased efficiency, productivity and profits. However, a poorly planned and executed CMMS project can result in a loss of revenue. These losses can be measured in terms of the overall investment in the project, as well as from wasted time and lost projected revenue forecast tied to the successful installation and implementation of a CMMS.

Planning

Properly planning the CMMS implementation project is one of the key elements. In the planning phase, you determine the “what,” “why,” “who” and “how.”

Equipment Data

Developing a plan for equipment data is a good first step because it will provide a CMMS with a foundation of hard, verifiable data. Some maintenance departments may already employ an equipment numbering scheme that is effective. This can easily be translated into the CMMS. If there is no scheme currently in place or if the current one is flawed, it is time to develop an equipment numbering scheme.

Determining an equipment hierarchy is the next step. This involves setting up parent/child relationships among equipment. For example, an air handler can have pumps and motors as children. If you are going to keep track of both the parent and children, the relationship must be documented. Make sure to include every piece of equipment that falls under that hierarchy scheme. Parent/child relationships also can be constructed for whole facilities. For instance, a building could be the parent with each floor a child. Each room could then be a child of the floor.

Information on spare parts should be tagged to the individual pieces of equipment. This is referred to as the bill of material (BOM).

Finally, you need to decide what you want from your CMMS in terms of downtime monitoring. You should choose which pieces of equipment you want to monitor as well as how you want to track planned vs. unplanned downtime. Plan based on impact or loss of operation. You should have this information for each piece of equipment or at least for critical equipment.

Preventive Maintenance

The following decisions have to be made for each preventive maintenance (PM) task:

• Will the PM be performed by calendar time or run time (miles, hours, etc.)?
• Will the PM follow a fixed schedule (regardless of completion date) or a schedule based on completion date?
• How often will PM work orders be generated (daily, weekly, monthly, etc.)?
• What are the strategies for route-based PMs? (For example, an inspection route for all fire extinguishers in a building.)

Procedures

Procedures can be preventive maintenance, safety instructions or any other set of instructions. Each piece of equipment should have identified for it all the preventive, corrective and predictive maintenance tasks necessary to properly maintain that equipment. Along with the maintenance task, information regarding maintenance frequency, responsible craft, repair and/or consumable parts necessary to compete the maintenance task, and time estimated to compete the task are some of the additional information that will enhance the usefulness of your CMMS database. These procedures can then be applied anywhere within the CMMS.

Labor

You need information on each maintenance technician such as name, address, phone, Social Security number, etc. You also have to decide if you are going to use some sort of ID card for your technicians that can be scanned by a reader. If you do, will the cards be produced in-house or by an outside vendor?

Inventory

The following actions must be taken:
First, you have to develop a part-numbering scheme. This is similar to the process used for equipment numbering. Some companies use a 20- to 30-character-long part-numbering scheme. It includes every detail of that part (i.e., type of part, thickness, diameter, location, etc.). With advances in CMMS and a field available for each of these details (category, dimensions, location, etc.), you don’t need a part-numbering scheme to include all of the details. It just increases the potential for data-entry errors.

Implicit in the development of a part-numbering scheme is the need to concretely define the details of parts. The most useful in terms of work flow is defining the location of a part. Is there one or multiple stockrooms? Is there a location scheme within the stockroom (i.e., aisle, bins, shelves, etc.)?

In the data-gathering phase, you will compile a list of all the vendors from which you buy parts and services. One of them should be assigned as a primary vendor for each part. The CMMS automatically generates purchase orders to the primary vendors. This can be changed by the users if desired.


At this stage, you have to decide the criteria for selecting a primary vendor (i.e., price, delivery, overall service, etc.). Additionally, you should track vendor/manufacturer part numbers for cross-referencing purposes. You also need to decide the issue units that you are going to use (metric, British or a combination of both). How are you going to handle inventory of pipes, beams, etc.? Are you going to keep track of lengths? If a piece is cut, are you going to keep track of the remaining pipe length? Once vendor and tracking information is decided upon, you also need to determine:

• Who has the authority to order parts and up to what amount?
• Beyond what amount will further approval be required?

In the overall planning of the physical inventory process, you must make the following decisions:

• How often are you going to take the physical inventory?
• Who is going to do it?
• Is it going to be manual or using mobile technology? If it is manual, make sure your CMMS has the capability to print the appropriate forms for this purpose.

Associated with this step is development of a parts label design and barcode label design. What information do you want to print on the parts labels? Part number, description and location are typical. If you are using barcoding with inventory, you have to decide which information items you want barcoded. Part number and location are typical.

If you have multiple plants/facilities, it is important that every facility follows the same schemes. Without consistency, the CMMS will not be very effective. If you are looking for a part at a different facility and that facility describes the part differently than you do, you may not find it even if it is in stock.

Purchasing and Accounting

You likely will need the purchasing and accounting departments involved in the planning phase for these:

• “Bill to” information
• “Ship to” information
• Sales tax rate
• Determine budget accounts and amounts

Codes

You should determine what plan and design codes will be used throughout the CMMS. During the planning phase, you need to decide on strategies for the basis of codes. Actual compilation of codes will be done during the data-gathering phase. Determine the following:

• Account codes
• Work order type
• Failure codes
• Action codes
• Repair codes
• Work order priority
• Equipment criticality
• Work order status
• Purchase order status
• Departments

Mobile Applications

If you are employing mobile applications, you need to identify each application and work on articulating the details. Some examples include using a hand-held remote data-entry device to collect equipment meter readings, parts can be issued and/or returned using a hand-held device, hand-held devices can be used to count and track inventory parts, etc.

Backup

Decisions also need to be made regarding data backup. An articulated backup scheme should be formed that takes into account both hardware and setup. Determine how often backup will be done (daily, weekly, etc.).

History

Plan for the type of maintenance history you want to maintain. Your decisions should include date performed, task performed, the person(s) who performed the job, estimated and actual time to perform, equipment performed on, material used, and any outside contractor cost incurred.

Decisions

Several decisions need to be made regarding the general operation of your CMMS. These questions provide information not only for planning but also for evaluating current capabilities:

• Are you going to print estimated time on work orders?
• What details of reports are needed in your CMMS?
• Which reports are needed in graphics format?
• What decisions will be made based on reports analysis?
• Security issues: Who is permitted to do what?
• Field legends: Do you need to change the terms provided by your CMMS on any of the legends? If yes, be sure to document the changes.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Develop a list of KPIs for your application. At this stage, you should review them and revise, if necessary. Also, determine how you would compute those KPIs. Most of the KPIs should come from CMMS reporting.

Assign Responsibilities

Plan on who will:

• Install the hardware (if necessary)
• Maintain the computer hardware, backups, etc.
• Perform archiving and merging of data
• Take care of disaster recovery
• Generate reports
• Review and analyze various reports
• Plan and schedule work orders
• Do the ongoing data entry
• Close work orders
• Be responsible for customizing, configuring, tailoring and maintaining the CMMS

The planning stage of a CMMS is perhaps one of the most important in ensuring success. Granted, implementation itself is not a short process, but with a well-laid-out plan where all possibilities are considered, the process will be simpler and streamlined.

The major challenge in planning a CMMS is considering the entire breadth of your operation down to every last piece of equipment, part and facility, and then remaining realistic with your goals. Consider the abilities of your operation to adapt to a new technology in a manner that will not unduly disrupt workflow. With a laid-out plan, you will reap the rewards for many years.

About the Author

Kris Bagadia

Kris Bagadia is the founder and president of PEAK Industrial Solutions. He has experience in all facets of the maintenance management process and has stayed at the forefront of CMMS/EAM technology ... Read More

How Reliable is Your Training?

Article extract from Reliaplant newsletter:
http://www.reliableplant.com/Read/28929/how-reliable-training

Training is the backbone of preparation to perform the assigned duties in any position you hold. I cannot think of a single job in the world that does not require some kind of training to at least improve performance of the task.

The question then becomes, “What kind of training do I need for this job?” Throughout the years, I have attended and provided many different types of training, and every instance was different. Some training seemed lackluster and really did not provide much benefit for the time spent, while other training sessions were the winning ticket.

What does this have to do with reliability engineering?

Reliability engineers have to deal with a lot of different failure causes, including the human-related kind. Many times the human-related cause of the failure is the result of a lack of training or improper training. Too often we just say that the technicians or operators need more training.

I believe this is the same problem we are facing in other areas of our society. Just throwing money or, in this case, “training” does not necessarily solve the problem. It really comes down to finding the right tool for the job.

Sometimes reliability engineers do not have anything to do with training other than when it deals with “reliability.” In many cases, they do not need to be involved unless there is a problem with human-related issues. “Operator error” or other human-related causes are often overlooked or deflated until they become this huge looming cloud that can’t be avoided.

As a reliability engineer, I think it is a good idea to have a place where you can note different cases of human-related issues and what the core deficiencies are most likely to be. From this information, the training can be adjusted to meet the needs of the company.

Some ways of using the information for training decisions include:

• General or specific
• Informal or formal
• On the job, classroom or computer-based

All of the training types are not equal, and just picking something because it is related to that area does not mean success. If there is no training that is related to the specific issues, then some investigation should be performed to identify proper training.

In cases where there is already training provided, there should be a review of the training to verify it is the best and most effective training, and if not, what are the other possibilities?

Reliability engineers have direct input to trades, tools and parts requirements for the maintenance that must be performed. Why not have reliability engineers give direct input into the training that affects all of these areas?

When to Use Hard-pipe Lubricant Dispensing

Article extracted from Machinery Lubrication website:
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/29345/hard-pipe-dispensing

In all the plants I have visited, the lubrication systems that seem to save the most time and labor for their maintenance personnel are machines that are hard-piped to either a large bulk oil tank or a large oil tote. While piping machines into a lube source isn’t a new concept, it is one that is rarely seen in practice. Usually you find these types of systems employed at places like power plants with large turbine systems that hold thousands of gallons of oil, but they can be used for countless other applications as well.

Piping supply lines to machines makes sense in several situations. For instance, in many refineries there are countless rows of pumps all using the same lubricant. Since these pumps are stationary and typically operated 24 hours a day, they would be good candidates to be hard-piped together to a large oil tank. Piping to a common lube oil tank greatly reduces the amount of labor required for an oil change and can save as much as 90 percent of the labor costs when compared to the storage and handling of oil drums.

Another situation in which piping a machine to a lube oil tank could be advantageous is when a machine or component has a high oil consumption rate. I have seen some machines leak as much as 300 gallons of oil per week. All of this oil is reclaimed, the machine is taken out of commission, and then new oil is added until it is cleared to be returned to service. In these types of scenarios, having a direct line to a bulk oil tank not only would reduce the labor costs associated with handling drums but would also greatly decrease the amount of time the machine is out of service.

When looking at the cost of an oil change, the oil usually accounts for only a small percentage of the total cost, while the cost of downtime or lost production due to the machine being out of service accounts for a much higher percentage. So you are saving money from the labor needed to handle the oil as well as by returning machines into service much quicker.

Hard-piping machines to a fixed oil supply is one way
to address a lack of available labor to handle oils.

One other factor in determining whether this type of system is appropriate for your facility is if there is enough manpower onsite to handle lubricants. If the plant is understaffed, oil changes are generally done haphazardly and only when something breaks down. This leads to the plant’s overall machinery reliability being very low. Piping machines to a fixed oil supply is one way to address the lack of available labor to handle oils. Since this reduces the amount of hours it takes to perform an oil change, the plant can run more efficiently with the staff it already employs.

Understanding when to hard-pipe a system to oil supplies is only part of the issue. You must also weigh the risks vs. the rewards to ensure that it will be worth the initial investment. With that said, one of the largest drawbacks to these systems is the up-front costs, as some of the components can be very expensive. Not only must you purchase the piping material and fittings, but there are also pumps, valves, flow meters and the tank from which the oil will be pumped.

The material cost is one side of the equation; the other side is the labor cost to install all of the hardware and components. This is a labor-intensive project, especially if a storage tank must be erected to house the lubricant. When completed, the system will begin to recoup some of the costs associated with the installation, but the payback period will vary based on the amount of labor saved and downtime reduced.

Advantages of Hard-Piping

• Low cost of labor to store and handle lubricants
• Online filtration and fluid conditioning
• Low new-oil waste
• Online oil analysis
• Lower cost of bulk oil
• No drum deposits
• Low risk of the wrong oil use

Disadvantages of Hard-Piping

• High cost to install pumps, valves, piping, volume meters, storage containers, etc.
• Risk of high-volume leakage
• Lines running outdoors exposed to temperature extremes
• Defective new lubricant exposed to all machines

Another disadvantage of hard-piping systems is the risk of a high-volume leak. Since more oil is stored in a much larger volume, any leak is amplified by the amount of oil volume the system can hold. Proper monitoring and installation will mitigate leaks, but periodic inspections of all fittings and tanks are paramount to ensure any leakage or environmental impact is kept to a minimum.

The advantage of storing large amounts of oil onsite is the cost savings associated with purchasing oil in bulk volumes as opposed to drums. Generally, the larger volumes of oil you buy, the greater the discount you receive. In addition, there will be less drum inventory to be kept on hand. Of course, not all facilities utilize enough oil for piped lubricant systems to be cost-effective.

60%	of plants have machines that are hard-piped to a large bulk oil tank or a large oil tote, based on a recent poll at machinerylubrication.com

Beware of buying tanker trucks full of oil. If the truck is filled with the wrong oil or a bad batch of oil, all of the machines piped to the storage tank will be at risk of receiving this bad oil. The only way to ensure the oil quality coming in is to sample each compartment of the truck before it is loaded into the storage tank.

A bulk storage system complete with piping offers many great sampling opportunities so you can be confident that the machines attached to it are receiving oil that is clean, cool and dry. If you are able to deliver lubricant to your machines with those three qualities, no matter how it gets there, the machines will have a longer life and run more efficiently.

About the Author

Wes Cash

Wes Cash is a senior technical consultant with Noria Corporation, focusing on machinery lubrication and maintenance in support of Noria's Lubrication Program Development (LPD). He holds a ... Read More