Large amounts of maintenance dollars and resources are often budgeted to develop and implement an initiative such as a lubrication program. Once the program is in place, however, attention focused on ensuring that full benefit is continually received from the initial expenditure may be insufficient. Programs put in place to meet a requirement or management expectations, without established ownership and a guiding vision, can decay into a low value day-to-day chore. The maintenance tasks supporting the program may eventually be looked at as busy work and, as a result, may even be deferred. To defend against this possible loss of program focus and value, a program document and dedicated program ownership must be clearly established as part of the development and implementation process. Without ownership, the organizational changes that have become a part of every day life in power plants can undermine the intent and benefits of a well-developed lubrication program.
Although all power generation facilities have a lubrication function, not all recognize it as a total program. Even in facilities where there are no efforts to perform oil analysis, or any of the other proactive measures that are mentioned throughout this document, there are still activities related to lubrication, including purchasing, filling of equipment, topping-off, changing oil, disposal, and so on. The lubrication function typically falls under a number of different organizations such as Operations, Maintenance, Procurement, Engineering, Storeroom, Chemistry, or other
departments. When the components of the lubrication function are performed over such a wide range of organizations and individual responsibilities, it can be difficult to establish a cohesive effort to pursue lubrication excellence. That is why one of the key elements, program
management, is so critical in ensuring progress toward the goal of achieving lubrication
excellence. Program management begins with an understanding of all of the key elements needed to establish a quality lubrication program. There also needs to be an understanding of the roles and responsibilities that must be in place to ensure that the completion of various activities associated with such a program are performed by the many different disciplines. Some of these activities include:
• Product receipt and inspection • Equipment overhauls/PM activities • Quality assurance
• Storage and handling • Engineering design
EPRI Licensed Material
Program Management
• Equipment top-off • Sample tap installation • Lubrication tasks • Equipment walk-downs • Disposal
One of the first steps in pulling this effort together is the creation of a program document, or procedure, that governs the scope and defines the roles and responsibilities of those individuals whose activities impact the lubrication program. This document must be a living product so that it reflects changes in the program and captures experiences and best practices.
Dedicated Ownership of the Lubrication Program
Although a program document lays the groundwork for creating and defining the program, the establishment of a program owner is the single most important step in ensuring development, growth, and focus as the plant’s work practices begin to change. Program ownership may come in several different forms. During program development and implementation, a team of
employees will join to provide the necessary input to ensure that the program development process meets the needs and expectations of the management sponsor. The group usually
includes, but is not limited to, representatives from plant Operations, Engineering, Maintenance, Work Management, and PdM personnel. Input from the lubricant vendor and laboratory service providers may also be beneficial. To provide a single point of focus for this concerted effort, it is important that a single individual in the organization be appointed as the overall Program Owner. This individual should be knowledgeable in a number of areas. The Program Owner should have the following:
• A full understanding of why each task type (routine task, PM, PdM) was selected for each component in the lubrication program
• A working knowledge of the plant’s corrective maintenance (CM), preventive maintenance (PM), predictive maintenance (PdM), and proactive maintenance (PAM) processes
• Strong training and background in lubrication theory, application, and laboratory analysis • An entrepreneurial mindset without fear of change
• A working knowledge of the components in the program
• The ability to communicate with others responsible for equipment reliability
Communication will be key as the Program Owner works with various plant personnel to establish specific roles and responsibilities required to implement and sustain a quality lubrication program.
EPRI Licensed Material
Program Management
Roles and Responsibilities
When implementing a comprehensive lubrication program, it is extremely important to identify all tasks that are required to establish and sustain an effective program. It is equally important to establish clear expectations and to assign roles and responsibilities for these tasks. One main reason for this is the fact that the various individuals assigned to perform the lubrication-related functions stated previously, typically do not report to the Program Owner. This may create problems if priorities and expectations are not the same. The information obtained as a result of the tasks being performed will be instrumental in ensuring the overall maintenance and reliability of the plant’s critical equipment. It is recommended that, when establishing roles and
responsibilities, the lubrication Program Owner meet with the Management Team to discuss the expectations associated with each work group’s roles and responsibilities.
Sometimes this may mean the establishment of interface agreements that define how each work group will act. An example of the fruits of an effort such as this comes from a plant that had severe contamination problems, where particle counts on much of the equipment being
monitored were extremely high. In many cases, the particle counts could not be obtained due to the high concentrations of water in the oil. Initially, the Program Owner, working in the PdM department under Engineering, tried to address the contamination issue with little success. When investigating the problem, it was found that much of the contamination was the result of poor lubrication handling and equipment top-off practices. Unfortunately, these activities resided in the Operation’s side of the house and had been part of the plant culture for many years.
In a case such as this, it is difficult to change the culture or alter personnel behavior through the individual effort of the Program Owner. The solution to this problem came only after realization by the Program Owner that, if the culture was going to change, Operations personnel must be part of that change. They must understand the problems with the existing culture, take at least partial ownership, and must have buy-in to making changes. To this end, the Program Owner met with the Operations Manager and several Operations personnel to discuss the issues. During this meeting, various reasons became apparent as to why the culture was the way that it was.
Suggestions were also offered as to how improvements could be made. In the end, the
Operations Manager solicited a “champion” within the Operations department to take ownership of the lubrication storage and top-off areas. The Operations champion was to work closely with the Lubrication Program Owner to ensure that the contamination issues were addressed. Basic lubrication training for Operations personnel was scheduled as a result of the meeting. In the end, over a period of time, the serious contamination issue was resolved through teamwork, and everyone involved celebrated the success that was achieved.
The previous example demonstrates one way in which a Program Owner should function. The Owner realized the importance of not only identifying problem areas, but of facilitating the process to seek solutions that involved the roles and responsibilities of other workgroups. As stated earlier, communication is key to an effective lubrication program.
EPRI Licensed Material
Program Management
Communication
Other types of communication will also be required of the Program Owner as part of program management. Much of this communication will be in the form of verbal communication that may be a phone call, an email, or a personal contact. Participation in meetings, such as reliability and/or planning meetings, may also be required. The Program Owner is ultimately responsible for notifying all personnel or work groups of any conditions that may raise concerns relative to lubricant conditions or equipment health. This communication will often be in the form of formal reports delivered to different levels of management. To determine what information should be in the various reports, it is recommended that the Program Owner visit with the different levels of management, or other pertinent plant personnel who will receive the report, to discuss their expectations and desired report content. When using an electronic means of reporting, this should be a consideration as the reporting function of the software is reviewed or developed. Communication with other program owners within the industry can also be beneficial. A lubrication program owner may have acquired skills through training and field experience; however, not all program owners have acquired the same degree of knowledge in every area. This can be used to an advantage. Sharing of experiences and discoveries with program owners from other plants or utilities is a win-win situation for all willing to share ideas. In other words, it is necessary to:
• Get into the flow of information
• Request subscriptions to newsletters and journals
• Attend training and vendor presentations to discover new techniques in sampling and lubricant analysis
• Discuss the possible use of new products with the plant lubricant vendor
As a Program Owner, networking with others in the industry is essential to maintaining and managing a successful lubrication program.
Quantifying the Benefits of a Lubrication Program
Another aspect of good program management is identifying and reporting the value of the lubrication program. This is particularly important as budgets are scrutinized and cuts are made. The application of oil analysis and other precision maintenance activities produces real benefit to the organization. Often, oil analysts think only in terms of the savings associated with extended or condition-based oil changes. They frequently fail to capture value contributions related to equipment reliability or risk reduction. Effective management of lubrication builds reliability into the system, and oil analysis produces tremendous value when it provides advance warning of a failure event. The early warning system allows management to schedule activities to avoid production interruptions, and to have parts and labor lined up. Likewise, oil analysis provides information about the event itself so that the right “fix” is implemented, preferably removing the root cause of the problem. Performing a cost-benefit analysis on significant lubrication events is essential to demonstrating the value of an effective lubrication program.
EPRI Licensed Material
Program Management
Proactive and Predictive Benefits
Financial benefits generated by oil analysis and lubrication management come in two forms, proactive benefits and predictive benefits. Proactive activities, such as reducing particle and moisture contamination, changing or reclaiming oil, and upgrading a lubricant’s quality
specification actively extend the life of components. By controlling the forcing function, or root cause that leads to a failure, one can preemptively reduce the failure rate for a component or system.
For example, the relationship between particle or moisture contamination level and mechanical integrity has been widely researched. Reducing the particle contamination level of the oil lubricating a rolling element bearing from ISO 19/16 to ISO 15/12 will, on average, double the life of the bearing. Likewise, reducing the moisture contamination level in the same rolling element bearing system from 1000 ppm to 250 ppm would double the life of the bearings in the same system. If one elects to control both moisture and particles simultaneously, an additive effect is said to exist, which means that the total life extension is the sum of the parts, as shown in Table 9-1. Quantifying the proactive benefits is obtained with a simple calculation, by dividing the current failure costs due to wear and failure by the life extension factor. In other words, in the bearing system example, every dollar currently lost per year due to failure would be reduced by 75% if the proposed particle and moisture targets were achieved. Proactive
maintenance makes money because it effectively reduces the number of failure events that occur in a given time period.
Table 9-1
Total Life Extension
Parameter Current Level Proposed Level Life Extension
Particle Contamination ISO 19/16 ISO 15/12 2 Times Moisture Contamination 1000 ppm 250 ppm 2 Times
Cumulative Life Extension 4 Times
There is inherent complexity in the valuation of PdM activities. The objective for predictive maintenance is to produce a non-event, or to reduce the relative impact or severity of a failure event. Quantifying this can prove to be difficult. The value of PdM lies in its ability to provide advance warning so that unscheduled outages are avoided, parts and labor can be scheduled, run- time compensatory actions can be taken to limp the machine along until the scheduled outage, and costly chain-reaction failures can be avoided. The benefit calculation itself is only an estimate, even if much care is taken to extract details in which the problem was identified and eventually resolved. The difficulty with this estimating process is that critics of PdM will question the validity of the assumptions made to calculate the benefits. When calculating
benefits, it is necessary to make assumptions because the actual event, the catastrophic failure of a machine, has not yet occurred. In calculating benefits, there are two areas that immediately come to mind as obvious areas for potential benefits: avoided loss of production and avoided the
EPRI Licensed Material
Program Management
EPRI, through the EPRI Monitoring and Diagnostics Center, has devised a process by which benefits are estimated based upon realistic assumptions and probabilities derived from many years of experience. This procedure is used extensively in the electrical utility industry. Some of the basic assumptions are given in this section; however, the entire procedure is referenced in, “Beyond Detection—Realizing Value in a PdM Program,” George VanDerHorn, Computational Systems, Inc., Proceedings from the Reliability Week Conference, Nashville, TN (1997).
Basic Assumptions
With any cost benefit analysis procedure, as with the EPRI process, some assumptions and suppositions are needed to simplify the process. Some of the basic assumptions of this procedure are:
• There are two areas where a predictive (condition-based) analysis of plant equipment has an impact on plant operations and maintenance. The first area deals with the loss of generating revenue associated with the detected fault. The second area deals with the maintenance savings associated with early detection of the fault.
• Not all equipment failures are catastrophic.
• Not all catastrophic failures result in a loss of production.
• There are three possible outcomes for any detected plant equipment fault:
– Catastrophic Failure – includes the total destruction of the equipment under
surveillance and any other damage caused by the failure. These types of failures are often given a relatively low probability of occurring.
– Moderate Failure – includes only the cost of replacing the failed component parts and the impact of the failure on generating capability. These types of failures are given a higher probability of occurrence than the catastrophic occurrence.
– Loss of Performance – includes the costs associated with the resulting loss of service of the faulty equipment if the fault had gone undetected. This category could also be considered a minor failure and it often mirrors the actual cost of the repair.
• There are costs associated with the actions taken as a result of an occurrence. These costs are not always known when the cost-benefit analysis is done, so they must be estimated. These costs are subtracted from the estimated total benefit to yield a net benefit differential. The benefits associated with the detection of the fault, as defined in this procedure, are actually this benefit differential. Therefore, the reported benefit is the actual net savings experienced by the utility, not the gross costs avoided.
The M&D Center strongly advises the use of only management-approved cost-benefit
procedures. Plant management should be consulted prior to the use of any cost-benefit analysis procedure. If management should disagree with the procedures, then the method should not be used and management should provide an alternative method.
EPRI Licensed Material
Program Management
Program Management Summary
Good program management is based on an understanding of the fundamental key elements required to implement and sustain a comprehensive lubrication program as outlined in Section 1. In addition, the program owner must also understand how each element is intricately woven into the others. With this understanding, the program owner must facilitate the process of obtaining lubrication excellence by ensuring that roles and responsibilities are well defined and executed, and that the information obtained from the process is communicated to the appropriate plant personnel to make timely decisions regarding the operation and maintenance of the plant’s critical equipment.
EPRI Licensed Material
10
PROCEDURES
Lubrication Procedures
Despite requirements for many maintenance and operating activities, and overwhelming
evidence suggesting that poor machinery lubrication spells trouble for the plant, most plants lack clearly defined written procedures for performing basic lubrication tasks. The following outlines the importance of procedures for lubrication and four elements of a good lubrication procedure.
Importance of Lubrication Procedures
• Work Scope – Procedures clearly scope the work that an individual is expected to perform. They ensure that work is done the way management or engineering requires. If the proper method is to deliver 12 shots of grease pumped into the bearing, allowing 15 seconds to elapse between shots, this requirement can be clearly documented in the procedures.
• Consistency – In the absence of procedures, five technicians are apt to perform the same task five different ways. In the absence of a procedure, each individual has the freedom to
personalize the task at hand. Inconsistency produces undesirable results. Documented procedures bring uniformity into the lubrication task, while keeping everyone on the same page.
• Best Practices – A procedure creates the framework for standardizing best practices. It serves as the container in which to pour the experience and expertise of employees, outside
consultants, vendors, and others into a single document. This convergence process also enables the team to align the procedure to the goals of the organization. Just enough best practice for one machine may be too much for another, depending upon the relative importance of the two machines to plant operations. This can be true even if the two machines are identical in design.
• Training – Arguably, the most important role of lubrication procedures is that they form the basis for training lube technicians. Basic training about lubrication, lubricants, oil analysis, etc., is designed to provide the foundation that enables individuals to think like lube
technicians. Certification is another important part of the training process because it confirms that the individual possesses the skills to perform the job functions. This is called technology training. Although it is important, technology training fails to convey specific task-based instructions for completing a lubrication-related Work Order. A set of procedures serves as a