There’s little doubt that the 2020s are destined to be the decade of a true awakening. Sustainable action focused on containing and reversing the adverse effects of climate change on the planet and our daily lives can no longer be put off. Seemingly endless—and heart-breaking—news reports and graphic images of horrific destruction and tragedies associated with increasing levels of global warming say it all. The cost of ignoring this issue would be unimaginable.
SUSTAINABLE ACTION
As individuals, whether in the home or in the workplace, we imprint an eco-fingerprint on everything and everyone we touch. Through better understanding of our actions, and the adoption of a sustainable mindset, collective fingerprints can influence major change to a community or corporate “eco-footprint,” and more important, to the environment at large.
Sustainable action is recognized as both an understanding and approach toward the use of natural resources that should be consumed in such a way that no more is used than needed, whilst ensuring future generational needs are not compromised.
To be effective, a good sustainable-action program should be economically viable, influence people in a beneficial manner, and affect the environment (planet) in a positive manner.
In our personal lives, many will have already adopted simple sustainable practices that can be built upon. These may include recycling of garbage, plastic, paper and glass; car pooling with others and use of public transport to save on gas and vehicle exhaust emissions; home-insulation improvements, purchase of energy-efficient appliances, and use of electricity in off-peak hours. The list is long.
Reliability and maintenance professionals have a similar responsibility to act in a sustainable manner in the workplace. If you are a practitioner or program manager, that means adopting a “Fingerprint to Footprint” approach to asset-management practice.
As a follow-up to a challenge that I issued in my Dec. 16, 2019, newsletter column (see below), this first part of multi-part article is a call to implement maintenance-department driven “2020 Fingerprint to Footprint” action plans in your (or your clients’) workplaces by adopting a sustainable approach to reliability, availability, and maintenance (RAM) practices.
Click Here to Read
“The Fingerprint to Footprint Challenge”
The following proposed actionable items are simple, inexpensive, and easy to put into practice, based on energy-loss control, emission control, and consumable-reduction/recycle strategies. The focus here in Part I is on adopting an energy-loss-control strategy
AN ENERGY-LOSS-CONTROL STRATEGY
Energy-loss control is about ensuring that energy losses relating to asset ineffectiveness are under the direct control of the maintenance department, and that all heating, cooling, generated-power systems (including compressed air and steam generation), and mechanical-motion systems operate at an efficiency level no less than the original minimum design level.
An understanding of the direct relationship between asset-management practices and their effect on energy use is needed to increase asset lifecycle, minimize machine and system operating costs, and minimize energy losses. Savings are delivered through reduced maintenance costs compared to previous years’ repair costs, increased productivity/throughput/availability, and reduced energy cost per unit based on previous cost per unit. More important, this sustainable approach toward energy use will deliver a measurable reduction in carbon emmissions. A reduction in each asset’s energy fingerprint can add up to a substantial—and sustainable—reduction in the corporation’s eco-footprint.
Currently, there’s no better place to launch, or enhance an energy-efficency program than by updating your lubrication management program. Equipment wear is caused and accelerated by friction brought on through poor or incorrect lubricant choice, incorrect application of the lubricant (too much or too little), or allowing the lubricant to become contaminated. Friction will automatically draw more energy to produce the same output, whether electrical powered, or gasoline powered.
A “conservation” approach to your lubrication efforts will result in significant energy-cost reduction, reduced lubricant inventories and consumption, and fewer lubricant spills, cleaner equipment, reclamation and reuse of existing lubricants, responsible disposal of old lubricants, and substantial increases in equipment reliability, availability, and throughput—and all for little or no capital outlay.
REAL-WORLD RESULTS
The following case-study example is based on part of an energy-reduction program I was asked to implement in a metal-stamping plant. The referenced stamping press is one of five 500-ton mechanical, straight-side presses used to stamp out automotive bodywork pieces.
The press employed an OEM-designed, centralized, box-cam-style automated, recirculating lubrication-delivery system that provides a locally re-refined (reclaimed) EP 150 Gib and Way oil to both rotating main and countershaft bearings and all sliding surfaces. The lubrication system had not been calibrated since it was commissioned. Energy was supplied by an electric variable-speed drive (VSD), and the press was operated 12 shifts per week (Monday through Saturday) for a total annual usage time of 4,800 hours.
Analog equipment that monitored energy use over a 48-hr. period calculated the average usage at 25.2 kW per hr. The press was observed under load with an infrared (IR) camera that showed an unbalanced lubrication delivery on the main bearings and counterbalance shaft bearings, with a 45 F-deg. temperature range between each of the bearings. These conditions indicated a poorly calibrated lube system or partial blocked line. Furthermore, the lubrication system was found to have numerous dirty filters.
A lubricant and filter change using high-quality, name-brand lubricant and filters was performed, and the cam lubricators lines were checked for breakages/blockages. The cam lubricators also were re-calibrated. The press was put back into production, and a final cam-lubricator calibration was performed, using an IR camera to balance bearing temperatures. Press energy use was monitored for a similar 48-hr. period. The result was a dramatic 18% reduction in energy. The equipment’s average energy usage is now at a respectable 20.5 kW per hour.
Based on 4,800 running hours per year and a delivered energy price of 10 cents per kWhr (no demand charges or taxes were included in the calculation) the energy reduction savings for one press calculated as follows:
(25.2 x 4800 x 0.1) – (20.5 x 4800 x 0.1) = ($12,096 – $9,840) = approx. $2,256 per press
With five of these presses in use, under similar conditions, that would equate to a total energy savings of more than $11,000.
In addition, the combined energy savings of 112,800-kWhr was calculated against the site’s carbon footprint. Using the Carbon Trust calculation of 1 kWhr = 0.000537 emission-tonne equivalency, my client’s operation accrued a carbon credit of approximately 60 tonnes of carbon-footprint reduction for just five stamping presses alone. More energy savings were found as each piece of equipment was surveyed and added into the lubrication program that paid for itself in a matter of months, through nothing more than energy savings.
Other immediate areas that were addressed to assess energy use and asset efficiency included:
-
- leak detection and correction of compressed air and steam sytems
-
- alignment checking of direct and indirect (belt and chain) driver-driven systems on pumps and HVAC systems
-
- fastener torqueing and use of precision shimming to reduce vibration and eliminate motor soft foot
-
- tune up of diesel-driven generators to reduce exhaust emmissions and fuel usage
-
- improved work scheduling to reduce travel time, vehicle usage, and fuel consumption when perfoming facility maintenance
-
- identification of building air loss at exterior window and doors using infrared thermography
-
- installation of motion sensor/timers for room lighting.
BOTTOM LINE
These types of simple actions described here can fuel major improvements in your RAM and sustainability programs. They can be highlighted within an existing proactive maintenance program and inmediately—and automatically—promote a “Fingerprint to Footprint” frame of mind for 2020 and beyond. For more practical “sustainable-action” examples, click on the following three links to revisit Drew Troyer’s recent “Cut the FLAB” articles for The RAM Review:
“Regarding Your Threaded Fasteners”
“Build Threaded-Fastener Precision into Work Instructions”
“Optimum Reference States for Precision Maintenance”
In the meantime, stay tuned for Part II of this article. It will be coming soon.TRR
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ken Bannister has 40+ years of experience in the RAM industry. For the past 30, he’s been a Managing Partner and Principal Asset Management Consultant with Engtech Industries Inc., where he specializes in helping clients implement best-practice asset-management programs worldwide. A founding member and past director of the Plant Engineering and Maintenance Association of Canada, Bannister is the author of several books, including three on lubrication, one on predictive maintenance, and his latest, Energy Reduction Through Improved Maintenance Practices (Industrial Press). He’s also writing a new book on planning and scheduling. Contact him directly at 519-469-9173 or [email protected].
