The True Cost of Poor Lubrication

Transcription

The True Cost of Poor
Lubrication
Jason Kopschinsky, CMRP
Director of Reliability Services
Des-Case Corporation
Des-Case Confidential
1
© 2012 Des-Case Corp.
Quiz Time
• How important is precision lubrication to overall
equipment reliability?
99.1%
Source: Machinery Lubrication Reader Survey
March, 2011 (n: 347)
2
Quiz Time
• At your plant, have you achieved a level of
lubrication that you would consider close to best
practice?
Source: Machinery Lubrication Reader Survey
March, 2011 (n: 347)
3
Roadblocks to Precision Lubrication
Problem
Solution
Lack of knowledge or
understanding of what’s possible
External Support & Engineered
products/solutions & Training
Too busy putting out fires to
develop an action plan
Project Management Support
Lack of management buy-in to
provide funding
Develop a Business Case
4
The Role of Lubrication in
Machine Reliability
Less than 0.5% of a plant’s
maintenance budget is spent
purchasing lubricants, but the
downstream effects of poor
lubrication can impact as much as
30% of a plant’s total maintenance
costs each year.
ExxonMobil Case Study
5
What Causes Machines to Fail?
Loss of Usefulness
70% of loss of machine life is due
to loss of surface material
Ref: MIT, E. Rabinowicz
6
What Causes Surface Degradation?
Surface Degradation
Ref: MIT, E. Rabinowicz
7
What Causes Machines to Wear?
Primary Wear Mechanisms
82% of mechanical
wear is caused by
particle contamination
Ref: NRCC, STLE
8
How Big is a Micron?
0.001” = 25.4 microns
1” = 25,400 microns
Human Hair
9
How Much Does it Take to Contaminate?
One tsp of dirt in a
55 gal drum yields a
particle count of
19/17/14. That
means there are
about 1 billion
particles in the
drum which are
greater than 4
microns in diameter.
10
How Clean is New Oil?
With few exceptions, new
oil is never clean enough for
common applications. New
oil must be filtered before
installation to provide any
reasonable level of
cleanliness.
New Oil is Dirty!!!
11
Particle Effects on Component Life
12
Progression of a Failure P-F Curve
Failure starts
Precision PdM (high frequency
vibration analysis , oil analysis)
Wear debris analysis
100%
Vibration analysis
Audible noise/hot
to touch
0%
Operating Hours
14
Ancillary damage
Run To
Fail
Predictive
Preventive
Looseness
Proactive
% remaining life
Thermography
Catastrophic
failure
Time Based PM’s
“When evaluated on a benefit/cost basis, approximately
50% of PM tasks have essentially no value.” John S. Mitchell
Time Based
Time Based
Oil Drains
Replacements
15
Over Lubrication
Time Based Replacements
•
•
•
30 identical 6309 deep groove
ball bearings
Run to failure on test bench
Standard test procedures
The wide variation in bearing life
precludes the use of any effective
time-based maintenance strategy.
Ref: NASA RCM Guide
16
Contamination Control Strategy
Set Targets
Take Action
3
17
Measure Results
Case Study – Steel Mill Hydraulics
Principle strategy:
1. Set targets
2. Offline filtration &
improved Breathers
3. Good oil analysis
Results:
96% drop in hydraulic failures
80% drop in oil consumption
Hydraulic Failures
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
year 1
year 2
year 3
year 4
year 5
18
Automotive Press Case Study
93%-97% reduction
in particle
contamination
Particle Concentration (Particles/mL) =/> 4 micron
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
1
2
3
4
Sample Number
19
5
6
7
Automotive Press Case Study
Downtime
Downtime (Minutes)
54% reduction in
downtime
3 year
average
2012 YTD
A Line
6
B Line
7
C Line
8
D Line
9
20
E Line
10
Deploying Best in Class Lubrication –
Minimizing the Financial Impact
21
Lubrication Transformation – Business Case Analysis
SM
Managers speak in dollars and cents,
not beta ratios and microns. We need to
learn the language of management.
Managers really don’t care about
lubrication. They care about the financial
impact of poor lubrication.
Key Objectives – Financial Analysis:
 Work with plant maintenance management to estimate the amount lost each
year due to imprecise lubrication
 Develop an action plan to help close the gap on the most common reasons
for poor lubrication
 Estimate the upfront and ongoing costs to close the gaps
 Calculate the 5-year Net Present Value (NPV) and Internal Rate of Return
(IRR) for improvements
Note: Most companies have a hurdle rate of 15-30% IRR for project approval
22
Lubrication Assessment – Business Case Analysis
How much do you typically spend annually on ALL maintenance work
(mechanical, electrical etc.)? Include in your estimate both material and labor
costs for both planned (scheduled) and unplanned (repair) work.
In a typical year, how much do you lose due to unscheduled downtime,
production slow downs or off spec production? If you cannot provide a
reasonable estimate, enter $0 and proceed to complete the assessment without
accounting for production losses.
Of your total annual maintenance costs entered in question 1, what percentage
can be attributed to either scheduled rebuild/replacement or emergent,
unscheduled repairs? Exclude any costs associated with routine inspections or
routine predictive maintenance activities.
What percentage of scheduled or unscheduled repair work is performed on
rotating or reciprocating equipment, as opposed to facilities maintenance,
electrical equipment etc.?
Of the scheduled or unscheduled repair tasks performed on rotating or
reciprocating equipment (Question 4), in your estimation, what percentage are
due to poor lubrication (wrong lubricant, under or over lubrication, contaminated
oil etc.)?
By implementing a well defined lubrication improvement program, what
percentage of the lubrication problems entered in question 5 could have been
avoided?
23
Low Case
Estimate
Likely Case
Estimate
High Case
Estimate
$8.5MM
$9MM
$10MM
Maintenance Manager
$0
$0
$0
Production Manager
75%
80%
80%
Maintenance Planner
45%
50%
70%
Millwright/Mechanic
40%
45%
50%
Mechanic/Lube Tech
30%
35%
40%
All
Lubrication Assessment – Business Case Analysis
Response Calculated value
Choose low, medium or high case estimate
Annual maintenance costs
Downtime losses
Scheduled PM and Repair costs
Amount spent on rotating/reciprocating
equipment
Percentage of lubrication related problems
Percentage of lubrication problems that can be
eliminated
Estimated Annual Losses Due to Poor Lubrication
Addressable Losses Due to Poor Lubrication
24
likely case
$9,000,000
$0
80%
$9,000,000
$0
$7,200,000
50%
$3,600,000
45%
$1,620,000
35%
$567,000
likely case
$1,620,000
likely case
$567,000
Lubrication Transformation™ – Macro Business Case
25
Foundry Case Study | Dust Collector Bearings
•
•
•
26 Dust Collector Units
250hp motors greased every 90 days
6” fan bearings greased every two weeks
Current Practice
•
16.65 fl.oz. of grease per motor bearing / 90 days
•
3.33 fl.oz. of grease per fan bearing / 14 days
Assumptions
• Cost of grease = $0.4/oz
•
Cost of labor = $25/hr
Calculated Practice
•
1.35 fl.oz. of grease per motor bearing / 90 days
•
5.48 fl.oz. of grease per fan bearing / 30 days
•
Time per shot = 4 seconds
Conclusions
• Using the calculated relubrication volumes and frequencies on 26 dust collectors, there
would be a savings of $1747.64 per year which has a 5 year NPV of $5858.00. In
addition, the amount of time that could be redirected to value added tasks is almost 40
hours per year.
•
The above calculations do not account for travel time or damage to the bearing from
over-lubrication or using the wrong lubricant reducing the useful life of the bearings.
•
The grease selection for the fan bearings was also incorrect. A grease with a lower base
oil viscosity should be selected.
26
Foundry Case Study | Bearings
Statistics
• More than 50% of electric motor failures are
bearing related.
• An estimated 95% of all bearing failures are
premature.
• 58% of bearing failures are due to poor lubrication,
contamination, over-lubrication or wrong lubricant
selection.
Assumptions
• $65,796.50 total electric motor purchases and rebuilds in 2011.
• $1,496,623 total bearing purchases in 2011 (not including electric motor bearings)
Conclusions Based on Statistics
• $65,796.50 x 50% x 58% = $19,080.99 failures likely due to poor lubrication, contamination, overlubrication or wrong lubricant selection in 2011.
•
$1,496,623 x 58% = $868,041 in avoidable lubrication failures total bearing purchases in 2011 (not
including electric motor bearings)
27
Foundry Case Study – Closing the Gap
GAP
= Benefits - Total Upfront Program Costs
= ($1747.64 + $19,080.99 + $868,041) - $344,750
= $924,258.49 - $344,750
= $544,119.63
28
Questions?
Putting best practices
into practice…
Jason Kopschinsky, CMRP
Director of Reliability Services
Des-Case Corporation
905.999.0076
[email protected]
29

The True Cost of Poor Lubrication

Transcription

Similar documents

The ULTIMATE LUBER - Lube Systems of California

20 Volt Lithium-Ion Grease Gun

Silego Technology - Globalpress Electronics Summit

Indonesian Diaspora Network Southern California

9718 Aquael - Acri-tec

Manufacturing Energy Management Solution (MEMS)

MACHINE TOOL INDUSTRY SOLUTIONS

JOB FAIR - Scaddabush

8625 MastLubTech MLA1.indd

re-imaging your future.