Machinery Lubrication magazine published by Noria Corporation
Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/1080534
www . machinerylubrication.com | January - February 2019 | 29 ML ML be the most obvious reason. ese details may include matters such as who is to perform the task, which tools will be required, in what areas of the machine will work be performed, what must be done, etc. For example, an oil sight- glass inspection task should not simply involve inspecting whether there is an accurate oil level. Instead, it should be a more comprehensive form of oil analysis. is type of inspection would include all three lubrication inspection zones: level, foam and deposits (LF&D); color and clarity (C&C) and bottom sediment and water (BS&W). e documentation should be complete with steps for analyzing the oil across all inspection zones, directions for remediation protocol and even annotated pictures, if possible. 2. Task Confidence (Job Satisfaction) For many, it can be difficult to feel confident in your job if the tasks are unclear or undefined, particularly if you are assessed against the outcomes. is is a common challenge for new personnel who have been hired to take over the lubrication activities but may not have any expe- rience. If they are given little instruction or are simply told to just "keep everything oiled and greased," they can become unsatisfied in their jobs. Performance will go down as they consis- tently question whether they are completing the tasks correctly. Even worse, if the machine experiences a lubrication- related failure mode, the root cause may be placed on this individual unjustifiably. e more this occurs, the greater the lack of confidence, and the more job perfor- mance worsens. 3. Task Consistency Routine lubrication tasks are often assigned to one or two specific lubrication technicians (or an area of the plant). is is important in creating ownership, consistency and ease of process control. As these individuals perform their work over a long period of time, there becomes less dependence on documentation for their job tasks. is can be both good and bad. It's good because efficiencies can be developed, but bad because the technicians are more likely to deviate, simplify or overlook task require- ments as they become more independent from the documentation. Keeping documentation as a routine refer- ence helps reinforce the validity of the work being done. Also, if the documentation is updated as deviations are proven beneficial, these efficiencies can be passed to the next ind ividua l per forming the tasks. is is essential, because if the individual responsible for the lubrica- tion activities in a specific area is suddenly unavailable (temporarily or perma- nently), someone else would need to step in. If there is improper documentation, a huge risk to the overall task performance will emerge. While slight changes may not be of concern for many tasks, with others like grease relubrication or oil sampling, even the smallest deviations in the steps performed can have major consequences. For example, if an individual uses the wrong type of sample bottle or does not properly flush the oil pathway, the results could show false positives. Likewise, if the sample is taken from the wrong location, a false negative or false positive could occur. In both cases, the corrective action to prevent a potential failure mode from progressing will depend heavily on these results, and the small details in the sample procedure will play a huge role in that. 4. Task Compliance Proper documentation is not just about how to perform a task but also how to report that the task has been completed and what the find- ings or outcomes were. For grease relubrication procedures, scheduling of the next instance of relubrication will depend on when it was last performed. is requires documenting the task completion and if it was done without issue. For inspections, documentation is simply a matter of verifying that each inspection point was not overlooked. If abnormal conditions are reported, this can be trended and observed more closely or converted to a corrective action. Proactive maintenance is one of the most effective ways to avoid unexpected downtime and extend the life of machines. Tracking task compliance with documentation is a key part in seeing the true benefits of proactive lubrication tasks. After all, what gets measured gets done. 5. Task Prioritization It's not uncommon for lubrication techni- cians to get behind on their scheduled tasks and for routes to fall into a backlog, particularly if the available manpower is not adequate. For many, this seems inevitable. As a result, planning and scheduling will require prioritization across several criteria, including all task and asset types, routes and locations. Documenting these details is a prerequisite for creating these prioritizations. Furthermore, prioritization should be optimized routinely. Based on the results of predictive and proactive analysis from lubrication tasks or other condition-based maintenance, machines exhib- iting early signs of a potential failure mode may move up the priority list. 6. Task Data Trending Whether it's a specific task type on one machine or several task types across all machines in the plant, there is value in analyzing data Ensuring Long-term Success of Your Lubrication Program If you are considering revamping your lubrication program, there are at least two reasons why procedure documentation is vital to support the long-term success of the program. As an improved program is implemented, many of the proactive measures will result in reduced machine failures and higher overall uptime. After years of the program maturing, there likely will be changes in maintenance personnel, a shift in focus with reliability initiatives and even changes in management. All of this may lead to those involved losing sight of why certain daily lubrication tasks are necessary. If few machines are experiencing lubrication-related failures, a perception may even arise that these tasks are irrel- evant. However, if the activities are well-documented and the key metrics were tracked during and after the program's implementation, there would be evidence to show how these "irrelevant" activities are directly responsible for the reduced lubrication-related failures. Also, if there have been changes in the personnel responsible for lubrication activities, it will be important to continue these activities with a seamless transition. Without documentation and properly scheduled assignments, a core part of the program will walk out the door with those who leave.