Machinery Lubrication magazine published by Noria Corporation
Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/778560
FROM THE FIELD O i l A n a l y s i s T STATE OF OIL he well-known KISS principle (keep it simple stupid) was first coined in the 1960s and began widespread use in the U.S. Navy shortly thereafter. While it started as a design principle for engineers, it has since been applied to any activity or creative endeavor that has had the propensity to become unnecessarily complicated. What becomes overly complicated also becomes, by default, poorly understood and sparsely used. Conversely, the greater genius in design and engineering lies in achieving the design objective through simplicity and pureness of form. This can be applied to the world of oil analysis in many ways. Increasingly, oil analysis has become engulfed by complex analytical chemistry and mathematical algorithms. This science is successful when it takes the complicated, such as an array of particles of varying shapes, sizes, textures, colors and compositions, and puts their formation into plain English (e.g., cutting wear on cylinder walls). It is less successful when it does the opposite, i.e., overanalyzes and overdetails. If someone asks you for the time, there is no need to give an explanation on how a watch works. Don't get me wrong, I'm very proud of the technical progress of the oil analysis field and the tremendous value it has brought to the world of machinery reliability. That said, oil analysis should always be viewed in terms of its many forms. These are not competitive but rather should form a focused and unified activity, each with inherent strengths and weaknesses. Collectively, they enable oil anal- ysis to function at its best. Like all reliability initiatives, this should deliver reliability at the lowest possible cost. It optimizes reliability, not maximizes it. It's about making the right choices. For instance, for a given machine, how frequently should you conduct laboratory analysis? How frequently should you perform wear particle characterization? These are necessary questions needed to achieve the desired optimum reference state (ORS). The four principle forms of oil analysis are identified and described in Figure 1. In recent issues of Machinery Lubrication magazine, I've introduced Inspection 2.0 as an important reinvention of conventional inspection practices. I see so many low-hanging fruit opportunities for simple, daily, penetrating machine inspections that often go unnoticed and certainly unex- ploited. It's far better to do 100 frequent "screening" inspections than one monthly or quarterly laboratory analysis. Labora- tory analysis should still be performed, but it is not a substitute for frequent quality AS I SEE IT Jim Fi t ch | Nori a Corpor at ioN INSPECT THE HEALTH How to Visually and 2 | January - February 2017 | www.machinerylubrication.com Lubricant Condition Monitoring Options Sensors are permanent and dedicated to a single machine or group of machines Frequent examination of sight glasses, magnetic plugs, etc., using multiple sensory techniques Portable instruments and methods are used at machines, typically without bottle sampling Bottles are sent to an in-house or commercial lab for analysis Real-time Daily Routine Periodic Unattended Real-time Sensors Non-instrument Field Inspections Portable Field Instruments and Tests Laboratory Analysis Figure 1. The four principle forms of oil analysis