Emerson Process Experts

My spy utility, WatchThatPage, alerted me to another good article, this time on the Fisher control valves and regulators area of the Emerson website. The article, Getting ready for the nuclear renaissance, from the April issue of Valve World magazine, features Bill Fitzgerald, director of the Fisher Valves nuclear business unit.

As more and more people around the world climb the economic ladder, the global demand for energy continues to grow. A nuclear power renaissance is underway, according to Bill driven by:

…issues like global warming and a desire for energy independence... It can never be the only solution, but it is a logical part of the solution.

Bill describes his team tracking forty U.S. projects. He estimates two-thirds of these will actually be built. The first ones may come on-line as soon as 2015. Bill describes the large engineering firms as well as the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staffing up anticipating the work required to completely design, build and commission the first wave of these plants over the next seven years. This expected growth is by no means limited to the U.S.

As part of this process, the engineering firms' procurement people need to identify and begin to purchase the long-lead items like reactor vessels, which may take three years from order to delivery. Control valves also fall into this long-lead item category. As Bill explains:

…control valves have long lead times because the ASME has just issued new qualification requirements. So to use a valve in a given safety related application will probably require 18 months of qualification testing. We also have to factor in ever-tighter seismic requirements. Then materials procurement, machining, assembly and testing will probably take an additional 9-18 months, depending on valve type. So, we believe that if we get an order today for a nuclear grade valve it could take as long as three years to actually deliver it to the end user.

And Bill notes that these valves are used in safety critical areas. Not having them will delay the startup of the plant. Based upon this expected global increase in nuclear power plants, Emerson and other automation suppliers are increasing their capabilities to meet this demand.

Technology has changed greatly since these types of plants were built in the U.S. a generation ago. Bill describes digital technologies like Foundation fieldbus, which can be used in the balance of plant applications to provide better control and diagnostic information. Devices like digital valve controllers have completed Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)-certification for use in this demanding application.

As energy producers seek ways to meet the increasing global energy demand, these preparatory activities are critical to meet challenging project schedules.

Update: I was just pointed to a great Béla Lipták article, The Third Industrial Revolution by a member of our DeltaV Twitter community. Béla describes the post fossil fuel world based on solar power and the role of process automation. It's well worth your read and I look forward to his book due out in August.

Tags: nuclear power | control valve | safety valve | digital valve controller | valve regulator | Foundation fieldbus | NRC | ASME | EPRI |

April 16, 2008 in Foundation Fieldbus, in Plant Equipment, in Power, in Regulatory Compliance, in Safety | Comments (0)

I use a service, WatchThatPage, to track changes to various pages around Emerson Process Management. It sends me an email when any page in a list of pages I have created has changed. I use this as one of my sources for the posts I create. This helps me keep track of changes in non-RSS enabled pages. For those who don't use RSS (really simple syndication), here's some resources on how it makes your information quest more efficient.

Late last week I received an email notifying me of a change to the Daniel liquid pipeline surge relief technical guide. I caught up with Dave Seiler to ask about this application and some of the challenges process manufacturers with high-pressure pipelines face. Pipeline operators and those with high-pressure pipelines are quite aware of the potential damage that can occur if a pressure surge occurs.

Dave noted that over-pressurization of a pipeline is commonly caused by sudden changes in liquid velocity. This may occur when a pump starts or stops or a valve opens or closes. When a pressure rise occurs above normal operating pressure, it's very important to analyze the rate of the pressure rise to determine the proper size and type of valve required.

Dave described line blockage as the most serious pipeline issue. To mitigate this condition, pipeline design includes valve interlocking logic and clear operating procedures. As noted in the technical guide:

…pressure is contained must have some form of pressure relief, which is often mandated and regulated by local authorities. The design of such systems is dependent on a complex range of factors including, but not limited to, the potential for pressure increases, the volumes which must be passed by the pressure relief equipment in operation and the capacity of the system to contain pressures.

This guide describes applications you may have in your facility. On application is a pilot operated pressure relief valve used for pump protection duty and for similar applications where pressure relief is required to maintain pressure at a given set point. Another application might have exceptionally fast response times that require gas-loaded systems. These are described:

The basic valve is the balanced piston design. Nitrogen gas is used to pressurize the valve piston to keep it in the closed position. The valve incorporates an integral oil reservoir mounted on the external surface of the cylinder head, which upon installation is partially filled with a light oil. Gas under pressure is applied to the reservoir.

Other applications described include surge relief valve closed position and open position. I found the pictures like this one help make the text easily understandable.

If you have high-pressure pipelines in your process, take a look at this guide and see how it might help you.

Tags: pipeline pressure | pressure vessel | gas pressure | gas tank | pressure relief valve | pipeline surge |

April 3, 2008 in Abnormal Situation Prevention, in Pipeline, in Plant Equipment | Comments (0)

High energy costs continue to prompt process manufacturers to seek ways to increase their energy efficiency. A colleague pointed a great post to me, The Seven Steps to Successful Industrial Energy Management, on the Energy Pathfinder blog.

My take away was that the culture for becoming more energy efficient starts at the top and developing metrics, incentives, and disincentives to change organizational behavior are keys to success.

I thought I'd share this post with Bob Sabin, a consultant in Emerson's Industrial Energy Solutions organization. You may recall Bob from earlier posts.

Bob believes improving the operation of the Industrial Powerhouse can be a large factor in improving overall energy management at process manufacturing sites. The carbon footprint of the powerhouse can be reduced, the reliability and responsiveness of the operation can be increased, and the cost of energy can be reduced—all at the same time.

With this focus (and not to be out done by the seven steps), Bob offers his ten steps to successful Industrial Powerhouse improvement:

1. Obtain top management commitment to improving the carbon footprint, reliability, and cost of operation of the Powerhouse.
2. Benchmark current operations in terms of efficiency, reliability, cost, and emissions.
3. Survey current process equipment, control technology, and operating methods. Create a matrix of factors that are impacting or limiting operating performance.
4. Examine potential process equipment repairs and upgrades that could deliver benefit, rank these in terms of return for investment, and complete repairs and upgrades that will deliver good immediate benefit.
5. Focus on process parameter measurement devices and actuators. Especially for combustion air and fuel flows, ensure that repeatable measurement and control capability exists.
6. Implement full automatic control that is robust and reliable. Even the best operating crews cannot optimize Powerhouse performance every minute of the day for every day of the year.
7. Install optimized control functionality as appropriate to optimize efficiency, prioritize lowest cost fuels, load equipment based on cost, and make economic operating decisions automatically.
8. Change Standard Operating Procedures for the Powerhouse to ensure that process units are run in automatic using the optimized control functions. Make focus of operations identifying and troubleshooting process issues rather than manual process operating adjustments.
9. Regularly benchmark operation in terms of efficiency, reliability, cost, and emissions, repeat steps above when results are not satisfactory.
10. Investigate and consider re-powering the industrial site with lower cost fuels and/or technologies.

Bob and the Industrial Energy Solutions consultants have helped process manufacturers achieve ongoing savings from improved energy efficiency by putting these steps into practice. If your energy costs are higher than they could be, give these ten steps a try or contact the industrial energy team for help.

Tags: industrial powerhouse | process equipment | industrial energy | energy efficiency | energy management |

February 4, 2008 in Energy Management, in Plant Equipment, in Process Optimization | Comments (1)

In spite of my best efforts to use persistent RSS search feeds in order not to miss any news about Emerson experts in action, here's one that got by me.

Mark Coughran, a consultant on Emerson's Advanced Applied Technology team, shared this control challenge question he answered with me. You may recall Mark from earlier posts.

The question he addressed appeared on the ChemicalProcess.com's Ask The Experts website. The question, Control pressure at discharge, was:

I have five pumps running parallel, transferring water. Due to pressure fluctuation at discharge, which depends on the flow requirements of the user, I am planning to install a pressure control valve at the pump discharge to keep the pump running at an optimum condition… What kind of valve is best for a 14-in discharge?

Mark notes that he's seen problems with butterfly valves used on large water lines, but that things have improved with better valve, actuator, positioner, and application software. Common sources of problems include wrong valve size, shape of butterfly disk, backlash in disk-to-shaft and shaft-to-actuator connections, poor valve positioner performance, and insufficient torque.

Control valve suppliers have addressed these issues in a number of ways. Examples include better valve sizing software, improved butterfly valve disk shapes, zero-backlash connections, valve positioners responding to 0.1% signal changes, and sizing software that predicts installed torque.

Mark points out that globe valves are typically too expensive for this application. Butterfly or segmented ball valves may be better suited if the supplier's test data for the valve + actuator + positioner shows suitability in similar applications.

Mark's final guidance concerns the control strategy. He recommends a controller tuning method that does not oscillate, but responds at the application's required speed, such as Lambda tuning. He advises:

If you need to control the five lines separately, there will be interaction and balancing concerns. The options range from individual PID controllers to a multivariable controller. All the options are easy to configure and tune in a modern DCS.

Tags: pump discharge | butterfly valve | control valve | valve sizing | valve positioner | segmented ball valve |

January 31, 2008 in Plant Equipment, in Process Optimization, in Variability Management | Comments (0)

I've highlighted the topic of plant turnarounds (planned downtime for maintenance) a few times in the past. Back from the Emerson Exchange, here's my take on the Smart Turnaround workshop. For continuous processes that run for years, this turnaround provides opportunity to update, fix, repair, and replace a host of plant assets including instruments, valves, electrical distribution equipment, connectors and cabling, and the overall performance of the process.

The Emerson presenters looked at the advanced planning that can be done from these various perspectives. From these diverse areas of expertise, diagnostic testing helps develop a turnaround plan that prioritizes critical asset work, defines the scope of work, develops the schedule for the work, and identifies the parts and people required to best get this difficult work done.

Chris Forland an operations consultant whose work I've highlighted in earlier posts kicked off the session discussing some of the challenges of the turnaround process. A big one is finding problems you didn't expect while in the turnaround. These unexpected problems cause extra charges and delays. Chris discussed ways that Emerson turnaround specialists can help with the detailed planning to make sure the work is efficiently performed during the turnaround. He noted that less time to plan mean less flexibility as the turnaround date approaches. Other challenges included maintaining compliance with safety and regulatory compliance, working with budget constraints, reducing process variability, losing experienced personnel due to infrequency of turnarounds, and pressuring of short turnarounds due to sold out condition of produced product.

Scott Grunwald, a turnaround business manager in the Instrument & Valve Services business, recommended that with the valves and instruments, you start by building the plan based on the benefits to be achieved the roles of all participants in the maintenance activities, and the prioritized list of activities and anticipated timelines. The process starts with a walk down of the facility. Next, FlowScanner is used to measure internal valve conditions to identify problems to address during the turnaround. When it's time for executing the turnaround, only valves needing significant work are removed. Other valves are repaired in place.

The team often brings an on-sight mobile trailer that is a self-contained workshop to rework the instrument and valves right on-site. This helps to expedite the repair process.

Looking at turnarounds from an electrical reliability perspective, Steve Metzger described the goal--to prioritize and focus the resources by pre-diagnosing troubleshooting, followed by the planning of the repair services and parts required to get the lead times properly. The key is to do as much pre-work as possible, fix what's possible, and remove it from the scope of the turnaround to lessen the pile of work to be done.

On-line partial discharge testing before the turnaround detects cables with degrading insulation that could cause short circuits and unexpected downtime. This testing helps determine which cables are OK and which need to be replaced during the turnaround.

James Beall, also highlighted in earlier posts, summed up the goal of a Smart Turnaround--to identify the items you can fix in advance, and prioritize what can't be in the turnaround plan. James and the variability management consultants look at the control performance and opportunities to reduce process variability through better tuning. James gave an example of a mixing temperature control loop where the deadtime was nine minutes between a change in setpoint and response the temperature was changing. The problem was not in the loop tuning but rather in the lag caused by the temperature transmitter being located 250 feet from where it should have been. Finding this early in the process allowed this installation mistake to be scheduled and fixed during the turnaround.

Chris closed this presentation with how you can look at the return on investment to help justify the experts required to make the planning and execution of the turnaround a success. It's a bit of a chicken and egg scenario since you don't know what type of ROI this turnaround planning can create without having the experts come in to begin the process of identifying improvement opportunities.

Chris has developed a model based on turnaround experience with typical costs from each of the aspects of turnaround planning and typical costs for the maintenance activities. This model is in an excel spreadsheets so that the assumptions can be easily changed to fit the unique aspects of each process manufacturer. Both cost avoidance and increased revenue from improved plant performance is calculated, each based on the size of the process and amount of equipment considered.

By taking a comprehensive planning approach, and getting an early start, turnarounds do not have to cause quite the number of gray hairs that they have traditionally been known to cause.

Update: Mitzi Amon, director of marketing for Emerson Electrical Reliability Services team adds that the prioritization is accomplished by performing online diagnostic testing prior to the turnaround to determine what electrical equipment needs to be serviced during the turnaround. This helps clearly define maintenance work scope during the turnaround and what can be done prior to the the turnaround.

Tags: turnaround | electrical reliability | partial discharge testing | variability management |

September 20, 2007 in Asset Optimization, in Chemical, in Emerson Exchange, in Plant Equipment, in Refining, in Variability Management | Comments (0)

Bill Broussard, a marketing manager in the Machinery Health Management part of Emerson's Asset Optimization business, recently had an article published in Plant Engineering magazine. The article, Act, don't react, for greater asset optimization, suggests a path away from operating in the world of reactive maintenance toward planned maintenance.

Process manufacturing is a very complex business with lots of things that can go wrong at any point in time. Bill describes how leading process manufacturers in highly effective maintenance programs spend less than 10% of their total maintenance responding to unexpected failures or "fire fighting" as some folks colorfully refer to it.

These leading manufacturers will spend around 80% of their time performing "planned" maintenance activities. He states more specifically, 25-35% on preventative maintenance activities, 45-55% on predictive maintenance activities, and the balance on proactive maintenance.

The analogy I'd draw is that of a car. The predictive part is responding to the intelligent sensors that provide early warning of an impending problem. The preventative part is doing the oil change every several thousand miles or kilometers. The proactive part is changing out components without embedded intelligence (like belts) at fixed mileage intervals. The reactive part is calling the tow truck when you have the hood up and smoke coming out alongside the road. I don't know about you, but reactive is my least favorite. It means lost time, high cost, and inconvenience figuring out what to do next.

Bill makes the case that process manufacturers who spend a larger percentage of time "reacting" than the best also experience higher costs and lost revenue. In the article, he states:

This reactive nature can be illustrated by considering an everyday occurrence: an operator sees a perplexing issue on the control system console but usually cannot leave the post to investigate. Maintenance is called to check it out, and this becomes a reactive work request – new work that was unplanned. It is a wasteful and potentially expensive use of resources, which is why those who lead their industries in operational excellence operate mostly in a planned rather than reactive environment.

Bill recommends that the shift from reactive to planned maintenance begin with creating an asset optimization culture that focuses predictive maintenance on key production assets. Cultural change is not always an easy thing, so he recommends:

…bringing in asset optimization consultants to identify areas for greatest potential to improve availability and performance. Through proven methods that evaluate the base of critical production assets, experts typically develop a prioritized asset list, which later becomes a part of a larger strategic roadmap for achieving asset optimization goals.

He cites a number of process manufacturers who have reduced downtime and maintenance costs by shifting over time their maintenance programs from reactive to planned maintenance. If your reactive maintenance percentages are higher than the leading process manufacturers' percentages, it might make sense to review the business case for change and bringing in a fresh set of eyes to help.

…Better that, than waiting for the tow truck!

Tags: asset optimization | reactive maintenance | planned maintenance | proactive maintenance | preventative maintenance | predictive maintenance |

August 31, 2007 in Asset Optimization, in Plant Equipment | Comments (1)

I received a call recently from an automation engineer facing an upcoming planned shutdown or "turnaround" in industry parlance. Actually "controlled chaos" may be a better moniker since a tremendous amount of maintenance activity needs to be squeezed into a short period. This engineer had come across one of my earlier posts on this topic and was looking for help in analyzing the control performance of the process control loops prior to the turnaround. This analysis helps identify control issues that can be addressed during the turnaround.

Time is money when the plant is not in production, so this time must be carefully planned and methodically executed to get all the maintenance activities done without schedule delays. Large refineries, petrochemical plants and other continuous processes will run for years between turnarounds. This means there are often new people working each one, which adds to the challenge.

Chris Forland, whom you may recall from earlier posts, reminded me that planning could extend beyond control loop performance to include a plan for the control valves and other plant assets.

Emerson's Asset Optimization team has developed a smart turnaround program, which puts a primary focus on control valves but also includes instruments, rotating machinery, and power distribution assets. The program includes a pre-turnaround planning and analysis phase, turnaround execution phase, post-turnaround review phase, and an ongoing maintenance phase.

The post-turnaround review phase captures the results versus the plan and documents the baseline and best practices to serve as "institutional memory" for the next time a turnaround is scheduled and new personnel are involved. Documentation to support on-going maintenance after the turnaround is also reviewed and submitted.

Chris recommended that planning should begin six to twelve months in advance since the flexibility to make changes to the plan diminishes as the turnaround date approaches. This investment in pre-turnaround planning and equipment analysis will be offset by avoidance of delays during the turnaround, reduced turnaround cost, and more efficient operations post-turnaround from better performing assets.

Turnaround specialists review diagnostics from smart instruments based on Foundation fieldbus and HART digital communications to determine which control valves actually need to be pulled for service. Portable diagnostic equipment can be brought in if smart instruments are not in place. Chris notes that typically only 70% of these valves need to be pulled and serviced.

This program ranges from a cost reduction only focus where units are already performing optimally, to a production performance improvement level, to a level of sustaining high performance through training of plant operations and maintenance staff to more effectively use diagnostics from smart instruments.

If your plant conducts turnarounds from time to time and if are going to the Emerson Exchange next month in Dallas, make sure to check out the sessions on smart turnarounds.

Tags: turnaround | control performance | plant assets | control valves | instruments | foundation fieldbus | HART communications |

August 23, 2007 in Asset Optimization, in Plant Equipment, in Process Optimization | Comments (0)

A colleague pointed me to an article, Timeline of a refinery pump failure and how it could have been prevented, on the Belgium-based EngineeringNet.be website. The story was about a South American refinery that had a high-speed centrifugal pump fail catastrophically resulting in production losses and large repair costs. Todd Reeves is in Emerson's Machinery Health Management team, part of the Asset Optimization organization.

What happened was an inboard bearing lost lubrication, overheated and finally seized up. The unfortunate part of the story is an automated motor-pump train monitor and advanced vibration analysis system had been installed four months earlier and was working properly.

This monitoring equipment included the CSI 9210 Machinery Health Transmitter connected to the automation system via Foundation fieldbus. This equipment did its job communicating advisory alarms it began to detect problems in the lubrication system.

These alerts went unheeded until they became maintenance alerts and ultimately failure alerts. Todd wrote that the health curve of the pump deteriorated rapidly in the final ten minutes before failure.

Why? The equipment did its job and dutifully reported the problem. The issue turned out to be more of overall unit tuning and alarm management issues. These alerts had been lost among other alarms coming in.

Working as a team, the refinery and local asset optimization experts reviewed the overall alarm strategy and identified opportunities to reduce the alarms and alerts coming in to the operators.

Specifically for the pumps, a best practice was established to add additional temperature measurements on the pump. Training was established to clarify how these alerts would be transitioned between the operators and maintenance staff. Clarifying this process is important when working with predictive diagnostics. At the time, it is not yet an actual problem—but like this centrifugal pump example—will fail if not addressed.

Tags: refinery | centrifugal pump | bearing lubrication | machinery health | foundation fieldbus |

July 30, 2007 in Asset Optimization, in Foundation Fieldbus, in Plant Equipment, in Refining | Comments (2)

Recently, Flow Control magazine published an article by Gerry Berry, a metallurgical engineer working with Emerson's Micro Motion Coriolis flowmeters. The article, Strategies for Proper Material Selection—Lessons Learned from 30 Years of Application Experience, shares considerations in selecting materials suitable for reliable fluid handling systems.

The article gleans a few key nuggets from the comprehensive Micro Motion Corrosion Guide and describes this guide as:

a repository of test data that has been accumulating over decades of testing and field experience with customers on hundreds of thousands of applications.

Over the years, Gerry and the team have used tools such as x-ray equipment, positive material identification (PMI), scanning electron microscopes, ultrasonic thickness measuring devices, Hall-Effect gauges, potententiostats, and hardness and microhardness testers to accumulate this valuable test data. The team also takes advantage of the National Association of Corrosion Engineers' (NACE) body of knowledge.

For those like me who may not be versed on the subject of corrosion, the article provides an excellent overview on corrosion and its causes and begins with a good definition:

Corrosion is the degradation of a metal or alloy caused by its reaction with an environment. Metals and alloys rely on the formation of an oxide layer for protection. The integrity of the oxide layer is dependent upon both the metal and the environment. For reliable protection, the oxide layer must be uniform.

Gerry provides several fundamental questions you need to ask to assess material compatibility:

• What corrosive agents are in the process and in what concentration range?
• What is the process temperature range?
• What material is being used for the piping?
• What cleaning cycles exist, and what fluids are used in these cycles?
• What is the velocity (particularly important when handling sulfuric acid)?

After addressing these questions, there are process-specific considerations like erosion caused by solids, liquid slurry, or even gaseous steam moving through a pipe at high velocity. Also, as I can attest from my earlier years on the oil and gas platforms in the Gulf of Mexico, humidity, salt water and other ambient environmental conditions must be considered. For processes requiring sterilization between batches, the clean-in-place/sterilize-in-place operations, the draining capabilities of the piping, and dwell time between batches should be considered.

Gerry provides some other scenarios like processes with chlorine, fluorine, changing chemical mixtures, and large temperature swings and the challenges they bring from a corrosion standpoint.

If your responsibilities include the selection of materials for your instrumentation, I highly recommend the article and the wealth of great information in the Corrosion Guide.

Tags: corrosion | coriolis flow | fluid handling | NACE |

June 12, 2007 in Asset Optimization, in Plant Equipment | Comments (0)

A leading research organization, the Aberdeen Group, says it well when they say:

In asset intensive industries, such as automotive, metals, mining, oil and gas, process manufacturing, utilities, and the public sector, the reliability and productivity of capital assets is essential to an organization's financial success. Maintenance of these assets can dramatically impact the overall performance and useful life of an asset.

Petrochemical manufacturers definitely consider themselves in this "asset intensive" group. As such, solid maintenance programs are essential. And it is especially critical to plan the times when they are shut down for maintenance. Known in industry parlance as a turnaround, these may happen only every 4-6 years. This means they frequently involve new personnel as people move on to new roles.

A Houston, Texas-based petrochemical manufacturer saw an Emerson Exchange presentation given by Emerson's Instrument & Valve Services (IVS) consultant Wade Enns. He described a Northern Alberta Oil Sands production project with 120,000 I/O to commission. A key to the success of this project was the use of the Smart Start project services methodology. It helped bring a well thought out plan and order to this huge commissioning task.

This methodology and associated software provides embedded check sheets and commissioning procedures for 196 specific equipment types, customized check sheets for planning and checking off tasks during the turnaround as they are completed. The process also helps prioritize the maintenance activities and documents them to provide an audit trail, should the refiner need to refer back to the maintenance activities performance.

The petrochemical manufacturer shared how they had real problems with their last turnaround with scheduling and quality of the work performed. Obviously, any delays impacting the start-up schedule mean lost revenue.

The IVS team worked with the manufacturer to plan the maintenance turnaround on the process with 600 loops and 1800 devices. The process began by building a Smart Start Project Tool database to capture the entire scope of the instruments and valves which were in use. The team took advantage of the plants installed AMS Device Manager. Next, to fully understand and document how everything was installed, they performed "loop walk-downs". This helped put together the plan for the priority and order of the maintenance to be performed.

Working collaboratively, the maintenance and IVS team fully documented and received signoff on the plan in time for the turnaround. With milestones in place, the team could catch deviations from the plan early so that additional resources could help in these areas.

The results were what this manufacturer wanted--a smooth turnaround executed in the allotted time. Given the pressures on everyone to get the maintenance work done in the allotted schedule, having this well thought out and documented plan definitely helped reduce the stress along the way.

Tags: turnaround | outage management | maintenance planning | petrochemical |

April 5, 2007 in Chemical, in Plant Equipment | Comments (0)

I recently came across a lubricant analysis story in Plant Services magazine about an electric power provider in Kansas in the U.S. It described how this producer wanted to reduce costs and improve machine reliability. The article described the importance of comprehensive oil analysis and the decision to do analysis in house with Emerson's CSI 5200 minilab versus sending the samples offsite.

I caught up with Ray Garvey, an engineer in the Machinery Health Management organization about this project. Ray said that Mark Mayworm and the team at Westar's Jeffrey Energy have configured a solution that is ideally suited for this collection of six power plants. Westar is one example of the truth in Drew Troyer's words:

Every successful oil analysis program I have observed has passionate technicians performing the work. And almost without exception, each includes some degree of onsite oil analysis.

Ray is convinced that a combination of these two things: passionate technicians and some degree of onsite oil analysis have produced a successful lubrication program for Westar.

Ray mentioned other documented cases, who like Mark Mayworm, have followed this lube program success formula and it has paid off:

Jaime Viramontes and others supporting El Paso Electric's PdM program achieved cost avoidance of $8.8 million over a period of three years. Jaime reports, "The oil analysis program has been a successful and integral part of EPEC's PdM/RBM program."

Ed Bohn documented 738% Return on investment with 2 month payback period for investment in minilab and training by General Motors.

Dennis Roinick and the entire PdM Team at Duke McGuire nuclear station won "Best Overall Predictive Maintenance Program" in Uptime's Program of the Year competition in recognition for their fully integrated program which includes an on-site minilab.

Herb Springer gives this reason for the reliability success resulting from on-site oil analysis at each of more than a dozen Southern Company plants, "The results I get from doing onsite oil analysis are more representative of the health of the machine at that moment."

Richard Kus of American Axle and Manufacturing found savings of $75,000 to $100,000 using on-site oil analysis.

Mike Lenz and others from P&H Minepro Services transport their minilabs to the mine sites as one part of their predictive diagnostic services in North and South America.

These folks and many others are Ray's heroes. Each in their own way is a champion for the cause of better lubrication practices in their diverse plant situations. Ray confided with me that he was one of a dozen developers who set out in 1991 to design cost-effective on-site oil analysis solutions and then to build credibility for those solutions.

For an engineer and inventor like Ray, there is a huge personal reward every time one of these "passionate technicians" calls in to say, "Hey, this is great! Let me tell you what I was able to find using your onsite minilab…"

Tags: oil analysis | machinery health | asset optimization | onsite lab |

February 13, 2007 in Asset Optimization, in Plant Equipment | Comments (0) | Trackback (0)

You know you need to periodically get your car’s oil changed and the lube oil system checked if you want the engine to last over the life you own your car.

It’s the same for many process manufacturers who have large, critical turbomachinery assets. These can include air and gas compressors, steam turbines, power recovery turbines, power generating equipment, etc.

Like the oil required for your car engine, lube oil skids maintain oil flow to the bearings, seals, and servo-controls on these critical turbomachinery assets. The lube oil skids must react very quickly in the event of an oil pump trip or other disturbance condition.

I spoke with Mark Coughran, an Emerson Control Performance consultant who was involved in a recent plant turnaround at a Texas Gulf coast petrochemical manufacturer.

Mark said the challenge with the lube oil skids is to maintain the oil pressure in these disturbance conditions, since the compressor or turbine will trip and the plant will lose production during the often lengthy restart procedure.

For this petrochemical manufacturer, Mark used his expertise acquired over the years of working with these skids along with Emerson's Entech Toolkit to find the fastest stable tuning of the pressure controllers.

In this particular case, Mark estimates the cost in lost production from a single turbomachine trip dwarfs the cost of his applied expertise.

Emerson also has online Machinery Health Monitoring to predict conditions which may cause a trip and alert operators in time to avoid a trip. I’ll have more on some of the experts who help manufacturers get the most out of this monitoring in a future post.

Tags: turbomachinery | lube oil | pressure control | petrochemical |

April 12, 2006 in Plant Equipment | Comments (0)