Hydrocarbon Processing - April 2022 - 13

Reliability
HEINZ P. BLOCH, RELIABILITY/EQUIPMENT EDITOR
Heinz.Bloch@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Valuable trends combine innovation
and time management
These days, regrettably, it is not unusual to encounter shallow
thinkers. A few months ago, we received a request from a
reliability professional overseas. He asked the author to clarify
a discrepancy between one of his texts, which recommended
an oil ring immersion depth of 5/16 th of an inch (in.), and another
one of his texts that recommended an oil ring submergence
of 8 mm. For the record, 5/16 in. × 25.4 mm/in. = 7.9 mm.
Better yet-and assuming that you are a manager-consider
asking staffers to become familiar with lubrication methods
that avoid failure-prone components.
I can only assume from the serious tone of his email that
the questioner was not trying to be funny; his request supports
my observation that common sense is in short supply today.
I am also serious when I tell you that if this 8 mm vs. 7.9 mm
individual reported to me, I would ask him to read up on what
oil rings do in a pump bearing housing and whether he is using
his (and his company's) time wisely.
So, it is an unhealthy trend if people are not inquisitive and
are offering unsupported opinions rather than facts. It is also
an unhealthy backward trend when people are impressed by
the sheer size of a supplier company, or the low bid price for
certain products.
Fortunately, we see a good trend in the approach taken by
" best-in-class " user companies. Chances are that looking at the
top 5%-10% (in profitability) of fluid machinery users and
collectively calling them best-in-class, we will see a steep upward
trend in their use of innovators. Remember, again, that
innovators create demand among the true reliability professionals.
Innovators do not wait for the average user company to
request this, that or the other thing. They make their innovations
known to reliability professionals and align their thinking
with each other. Putting it another way: they move forward
together, and they prosper together.
So, what does a true reliability professional do? We could
provide a detailed role statement with a list of 20-25 items.
Such role statements would clearly establish that conscientious
professionals will be proactive-rather than reactive-
in their contributions. He or she will have decided, before
signing on virtually or reaching their employer's parking lot on
ordinary workdays, what it is they will be working on. I could
tell you that as these true professionals drive home at the end
of the workday, they will ask themselves whether they have,
in fact, accomplished what they wanted to accomplish on that
day. The quality of their work product will be the principal
gauge by which they conduct this self-assessment. Just imagine
how rewarding it will be for them to say, " Today, I have
added some real value. "
Innovation can improve existing machinery. The author
recalls three of his (and perhaps the reader's) professional colleagues
who lived in the Houston, Texas area. Throughout
their lives, Charlie Jackson, Ed Nelson and (until 2019) Paul
Barringer preached equipment reliability. These experts taught
that every maintenance event should be viewed as an opportunity
to upgrade your equipment. In other words, every maintenance
event deserves our attention, and we must determine
if an upgrade is cost-justified. Jackson, Nelson and Barringer
knew that the difference between a maintenance engineer and
a reliability engineer is easy to define: maintenance engineers
put their effort into maintaining a machine in the as-designed
condition. They get activated the moment the machine is available
for maintenance or is taken down for repairs.
We may argue about definitions and (occasionally unpleasant)
connotations, but maintenance-broadly speaking-is a
reactive job, whereas reliability engineering implies working to
eliminate the need for most maintenance activities.
In sharp contrast, the reliability professional's workday is almost
entirely proactive, using any available time to provide the
answers to three questions:
1. Is an upgrade possible?
2. If yes, is an upgrade cost-effective?
3. Which innovative technology provider should
our company select to implement the combined
repair and upgrade tasks?
Needless to say, reliability professionals work with innovators
and make them their technology resource. The innovator assists
the reliability professional in working up and explaining payback
calculations. Together, the reliability professional and upgrade
provider research and document prior experience. Both participate
in defining the field experience at other client sites; this can
be done without breaching confidentiality. They join in preparing
a presentation to the reliability professional's management. This
is part of a structured machinery quality assessment (MQA) process,
which should be in the user-purchaser's budget, and which
contributes to decades of future machinery reliability.
HEINZ P. BLOCH resides in Montgomery, Texas. His professional
career commenced in 1962 and included long-term assignments
as Exxon Chemical's Regional Machinery Specialist for the
U.S. He has authored or co-written more than 780 publications,
among them 23 comprehensive books on practical machinery
management, failure analysis, failure avoidance, compressors,
steam turbines, pumps, oil mist lubrication and optimized
lubrication for industry. Mr. Bloch holds a BS degree and an MS degree (cum
laude) in mechanical engineering from NCE, Newark College of Engineering.
He is an ASME Life Fellow and was awarded life-time registration as a Professional
Engineer in New Jersey. He is one of 10 inaugural inductees into NCE's Hall of
Fame, which honors its most distinguished alumni.
Hydrocarbon Processing | APRIL 2022 13
Hydrocarbon Processing - April 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Hydrocarbon Processing - April 2022
