Machinery Reliability Through Root Cause Analysis PDF

Reducing Maint Interruptions /
Increasing MTBF of Critical Equipment

( Six Sigma Black Belt Project)
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control
Start Date : April 2010
Black Belt : Vijay S.Dhonde
Master Black Belt : Naveen Narayanan
Project sponsor : DGM Maintenance
Team Members : K K Nanduri / John Bosco

Neelesh Bhagwat &
RC Agarwal (BB) for guidance
2
DMAIC

Opportunity Current Root causes To eliminate To sustain
/ project performance root causes gains
• Focus on reducing variation

• Involving cross functional teams
• Concentration on processes rather than isolated events
• Share the experience
Key Lessons Learned
• Importance of working in Cross-Functional Team

• Concentration on processes rather than isolated events gives
sustained solutions (May be the word process generates Fear
and Resistance).
• Visibility through out the implementation process makes
acceptability of the project by majority.
• DMAIC Methodology as problem solving technique could be
applied to all critical issues.
• Opportunity to practice powerful analytical tools like FMEA,
Cause & Effect, SCAMPER etc.
4
ct
C
oje
PO
Pr
SI
C
VO
1
ms
DEFI NE gra
Dia
5
Importance of This Project
Present Definition of Failure
Today’s definition
of failure
Failure starts here
Potential Failure Functionally failed
The inspection and corrective

task must be completed within
P-F the P-F interval.
Interval
P
Equipment F
Condition
Equipment
Broken
Time
Maximize interval between Potential Failure and Functional Failure

Importance of This Project
“Normal state”
Equipment not performing

intended function
“Functionally failed”
P-F
Interval
Design
Potential Failure
Intended
Function
Failure
Risk to business (consequence) increase as we move along P-F Curve

Project Assumptions
What is meant by Critical Equipment?
An Equipment is considered critical where either it does not have any
standby or it’s non-availability would greatly affect plant throughput and
it’s failure will have potential threat to safety & environment.
What is Maintenance interruption?
An event or condition in which the equipment is taken out of service or
stopped for attending an abnormal state or part by maintenance however
small may the condition be is termed as an interruption.
What is MTBF and its interpretation?
Mean Time Between Failure is an average uptime available for an
equipment. In other words it is the average time an asset will function
before it fails.
In Refinery the MTBF is considered for equipments overhauled at
Machine Shop only.
8
Project Assumptions
Why consider only equipment overhauled at shop for MTBF?

• When pump is overhauled at shop it will be critically examined and
assembled.
• Also Machine shop follows standard procedures laid down by Original
Equipment Manufacturer and Overhauling activity is carried out by skilled
Maint personnel.
How failure of rotary equipment is recorded?

An equipment failure is recorded through basically in two modes in SAP.
• One by malfunction report generated by Operations through SAP
Notification type M2.
• Another by Rotary Recommendation generated by Rotary Cell through
SAP Notification type M6.
9
Project Assumptions
What base line data is being considered for the analysis?
Notifications or Job generation by Rotary Cell through SAP type M6 is being

considered for analysis.
Why Rotary Reco (SAP Type M6) alone is considered for analysis?
• Data in type M6 is highly authenticated, precise and created by a trained
professional.
• Data in type M2 majority of times incomplete and sometimes duplicate in
nature created by working level person.
• Type M2 notification data is more of descriptive in nature, while M6 data
comprises measurable data.
• While generating notification through M6 analysis would be conducted
based on condition monitoring of the equipment by the in charge.
• Also, data shows over 90% of cases bearing failures were captured in
M6 Data
10
Failure Pattern Identification (Equipment

Wise)
Par et o Char t of Equi pment
900 100
800
700 80
600
Frequency
60
Percent
500
400
40
300
200 20
100
0 0
Equipment Pumps Motors Comp/ Fans
Frequency 596 254 34
Percent 67.4 28.7 3.8
Cum % 67.4 96.2 100.0
Pumps contribution in failure pattern being higher

study will be carried out on pumps only
Failure Pattern Identification (Complex

wise)
600 100
500
80
400
Per cent
60
C2
300
40
200
100 20
0 0
C1 s s r
ng ng P ie ite he
s si ssi RM li it f s Ot
oc
e
oc
e Ut Of
Pr Pr
y ry
ar da
im on
Pr c
Se
C2 168 161 154 79 24 9
Percent 28.2 27.1 25.9 13.3 4.0 1.5
Cum % 28.2 55.3 81.2 94.5 98.5 100.0
• As per above Pareto diagram more recurring failures are observed in Primary,
Secondary Processing and RMP units.
• It is evident process units cover more than 80% of failure list. 12
Project Charter

Reducing Maintenance Interruptions and Increasing MTBF of Critical Pumps of

Project Description
Crude Distillation Unit and RMP
Improved equipment availability through reduction in repeat failures can greatly contribute to cost
reduction, throughput gain and compliance to environmental and safety standards. Also availability
Business Case of the Rotary equipments is essential to achieve MOU target of Crude processing of the refinery.
Cost of repeat failure alone contributes to over Rs 64 lakh which is around 13% of total expenditure
for subject period of 3 year this besides loss of through put on account of non availability of Eqpt.
In the 36 month period under study (April 2007-March 2010), 103 out of 594 pumps in plant areas
Problem Statement have been taken out of service more than twice for maintenance purposes, leading to reliability and
availability issues in plant operation. Such repeated maintenance activities would lead to lower
MTBF values( the present benchmark of 5.2 years) and will be a potential threat to plant uptimes.
Process Owner DGM Maintenance
Start: Condition Monitoring and Notification generation

Scope
Stop: Recheck and closure of notification..
Excludes : Failures based on malfunction reports
Metric Baseline Data Current Goal Entitlement

Project Goals MTBF Repeat Failure Average MTBF of Increase Average MTBF 36 months
list of Pumps selected list = 7.2 from 7.2 to 12
through M6 Months months

Project Charter
Top 3 critical tags for different failure modes out of identified list will be taken up for
Expected Tangible root cause analysis. Such process of avoiding repeat failures would not only result in
Benefits lower maintenance cost but also help maintain optimum plant through put.
One day shutdown of CCU on account of non-availability of critical bottom pump would
result in loss of over Rs.2.1 Cr direct cost (CCU Value addition Rs 7000 per MT Waxy
processing), can be avoided.
Expected Intangible With higher equipment availability, Process can have flexible operation. Once time
spent on repeat jobs reduced, better focus can be given to other reliability
Benefits improvement initiatives. Also improvement plans can be extended to other parts of the
refinery.
Team members KK Nanduri, John Bosco, Neelesh Bhagwat & RC Agarwal ( BB for guidance)
Support Required
Rotary Cell, Operations and Technology
Environmental conditions and operating at Turn down due to non availability of plant
Risks/ Constraints through put can greatly affect MTBF of rotary equipments.
15
CTQ Drill Down
Tree
Enhance Availability of
Critical Equipment for Ops
By Reducing MTTR By Improving MTBF
Increase Equipment uptime Reduce No of Failures
Reduce No of Repeat failures
Reduce No of repeat failures or

increase MTBF from 7.2 to 12
16
C O P I S
1. WHO are your 2. WHAT does the 3. What STEPS are 4. What is 5. Who
primary customer Included in the Process provided to PROVIDES
customers? receive? (Think today? (high level) START the the input?
(From Step A) of their CTQ’s) process?
Customer Output Process Input Supplier
(Who) (Nouns) (Verbs) (Nouns) (Who)
Availability of Equipment in Operation / Route Readings /

Operations Area Operations
equipment Condition Monitoring Plant Calls
Analysis and Release of type M6

Notification
Equipment Isolation and
Handover for Maint
Activity Completion by Area
Maintenance
History / Data Updation by Area

Maintenance
Notification Closure
Recheck / Condition Monitoring

17
Process Flow of Notification Generation
Site activities Recommendation Data Analysis

based on Reco release (SAP M6)
Data (history) Data Collection

Updation
Follow up reading
Route /
Plant Call
Reading
YES acceptable NO
?
Close Start
18
Stakeholder Analysis
Strongly Strongly
Stakeholder ARMI* Opposed Neutral Supportive
Opposed Supportive
DGM Maint X/O

A
Ops PP R X/O
Ops SP R X/O
Ops RMP R X/O
Rotary Cell X/O
R
Technology I X/O
* When Populating the Stakeholder, consider the ARMI: X = Where this Stakeholder IS TODAY on the Project
• A= Approver of team decisions O = Where this Stakeholder NEEDS TO BE on the Project
• R= Resource or subject matter expert (ad hoc)
• M= Member of team
• I= Interested Party who will need to be kept informed 19
Communication Plan
Target Audience Content Frequency Delivery Method
Top Management Project Progress Report As per Project Road Steering Committee
Map Review Meeting
Project Sponsor / Project Progress, Issues, End of Each Phase Project Review Meeting.
Champion. Milestones Achieved, Next
DGM (Maint.) Steps.
Key Stakeholders as Project Status, Issues, Bi-weekly Status by e-mail

Chief Ops Mgr (SP) / Barriers, Milestone
Chief Ops Mgr (PP) Achieved, Next Steps.
Operators / Technicians Project Needs, Issues, Need based As and When required
Barriers, Progress Done, discussion at site
Changes Done, Next Steps
Engineering Team Project Needs, Issues, weekly Co-ordination Meeting.

Members Barriers, Performance of
Machines.
DMAIC
DEFINE
Data
IMPROVE MEASURE Pareto
Pat
ter
ns
ANALYZE
Ca
p ab
ilit
y
21
Identification Process
for Top 3 Critical Pumps for Study
List Reduced
segregated Actions yet list based Top 3
Total Repeat List of Over
based on to be on source of
Failures two Failures
criticality initiated severity failures
index index
594 103 23 16 8 3
Focused pumps for Study
Equipment Failure Cost (in Lakhs) MTBF (Months)
001G10S - CRUDE OIL SEAL 6.8 5.1
001G11S - LONG RES BRG / OTHER 145 4.0
132P266 – EXCS WAXY BRG 36 4.0
Process Sigma for above 3

3.2
Critical Equipments
List of Top 8 Equipments for Study
Equipment Failure COST MTBF

001G10S - D3 BOTTO SEAL 541,453 5.1
001G1 - CRUDE OIL SEAL 984,054 7.2
001G11 - LONG RESI BRG 3,394,683 7.2

001G11S - LONG RES BRG / OTHER 14,437,919 4.0
001G12 - H.G.O. SEAL 533,272 7.2

001G31 - HEAVY KER OTHER 620,711 5.1
098P803B - FLASHED SEAL 546,555 6.0
132P266B BRG 3,613,592 4.0
BRG Bearing Failure
HIGH VIBRATION, PIPING, Internals, Seizure,

OTHER
Accessories ETC
SEAL Mechanical Seal Failure

Back Up Slides for Measure Phase
Back ground analysis

For Identifying top 3 Critical pumps for study
Process Capability Index
Number of defect
opportunities per unit
(Failure Modes) O 3
Number Of Units
(Notifications for pumps
under study) N 16
Number Of actual defects

(No. of Pumps under
study) D 3
Defects per opportunity DPO=D/(N*O) 3/(3*16) = 0.042

DPMO DPO * 1000000 42000
Process Sigma (From

table) 3.2
DMAIC
DEFINE
2
IMPROVE MEASURE
MASURE
ANALYZE
FM
Regression
EA
E
DO
Failure Modes in Pumps
Applicable Failure Modes in Centrifugal pump are

• Insufficient Capacity
• Insufficient Pressure
• No liquid delivery
• Vibration and Noise
• Short Bearing Life
• Short Mechanical Seal Life
Applicable Modes being analyzed for present case are
• Vibration and Noise

• Short Bearing Life
• Short Mechanical Seal Life
Cause & Effect Fishbone – Seal Failure
Measurements Material Personnel
Non adhering to seal

Use of Defective Spares / assembly procedure
reconditioned spares
Use of non-calibrated instruments Non adhering to bearing

assembly procedure
Use of incorrect BOM

Contaminated lube oil
Mechanical
Seal Failure
Improper bearing CW system
Incorrect support / piping installation
Pump Failure out of improper pump assembly
Incorrect lube oil level - brg guard/ leveler
Misalignment in Hot condition
Frequent Pump Change over -No defined policy
Improper Seal Flushing - NA to checklist
Improper Seal Flushing - Orientation of piping
Improper Seal Flushing - Chocking of piping
Incorrect Seal Design
Lower flow operation - lower plant throughput
Lower flow operation - ignorance about P-Q
Cavitation - process upset
Environment Methods Machines

Cause & Effect Fishbone – Bearing Failure
Measurements Material Personnel
Dirt/Moisture in housing
Improper Vibration Defective Spares

Measurement
Pump cavitation / Process upset
Bearing
Improper bearing CW system
Failure
External Corrosion
Excessive Load on the pump Distorted casing
Deviation from design conditions
Incorrect Bearing Design
Absence of Lubrication Bent Shaft / Run Out
Improper Lubrication
Improper Pump Installation
Improper Brg Installation Un Balance - Pump
Misalignment
Lower flow operation
Environment Methods Machines

Mechanical Seal Failure

Analysis
Root Cause Analysis

(Mechanical Seal Failure)
Main Cause Why-Why Analysis ( 1st ) Why-Why Analysis (2nd)
Misalignment 1. Alignment does not take process conditions 1. Improper skill or knowledge on Hot
2. Excessive piping strain service
3. Erratic instrument reading 2. Improper piping / support installation
3. Absence of Instrument Calibration
Wrong Mechanical Seal 1. Improper personnel skill 1. Lack of awareness or focused training
assembly 2. Use of Non-Standard Materials 2. Not adhering to Standard Procedure /
spare parts
Damage to bearings during 1. Improper use of tools and tackles 1. Not adhering to Standard Procedure
installation 2. Use of defective bearing 2. Use of Non-Inspected (by SKF) bearing
Bearing Failure while in 1. Improper Lube oil Level 1. Defective bearing isolator / leveler
operation 2. Improper Lube Oil Quality 2. Use of contaminated oil / Handling issue
3. Excessive Cooling or Heating of housing 3. Improper cooling system / Choice of
lubricant / defective oil ring or splasher
Suction Pressure variations 1. Operation outside acceptable range 1. Absence of suction surge vessel
/ Low flow / Pump 2. Operation much lesser than design point 2. Pump too big to handle lower throughput
Cavitations
3. Deviation in operating parameter/ 3. Process upset
Cavitations
Improper flushing of seal 1. Connected piping is chocked 1. Not adhering to procedure / checklist
2. Improper piping orientation 2. Ignorance or insufficient knowledge
Frequent change over of 1. Plant follow 15 day cycle it is too frequent to 1. No defined practice available
the pump adopt.
Cause Prioritization
MECHANICAL SEAL FAILURE - CAUSE Category Severity Occurrence Detection RPN
Improper Seal Flushing - Chocking of piping Method 9 9 9 729
Improper Seal Flushing - Orientation of piping. Method 9 9 9 729
Pump Suction Pressure Variation Method 9 9 9 729
Frequent Pump Change over -No defined policy Method 9 9 9 729
Misalignment in Hot condition Method 9 5 7 315
Cavitations out of process upset Method 9 4 8 288
Lower flow operation – Design Limitations Method 9 4 8 288
Lower flow operation - lower plant throughput Method 9 4 8 288
Incorrect lube oil level - Brg guard/ leveller Person 9 4 8 288

Cause Validation
Cause
“For Improper Mechanical

Seal Flushing Plans”
Improper Seal Flushing Plans in

CDU G10/10S/G2/G2S/G11/G11S
Cyclone Replaced by
Separator Strainer
Original Seal Flushing Plan API Present Seal Flushing Plan API
31 12
Improper Seal Flushing Plans
Cyclone Separator Strainer dirt remains and

Dirt goes back to chocks the path in due
suction course
Improper Seal Flushing Plans
CYCLONE SEPARATOR API 31 STRAINER API PLAN 12
Process liquid is recirculated Process liquid is recirculated

through a cyclone separator to the through a strainer to the seal.
seal. Solid particles are centrifuged Solid particles are separated
through cyclone separator and sent through fine filter element or
back to suction. The Plan is mesh. This plan is used generally
specified for services containing with clean liquids.
solids with a specific gravity at least
twice that of the process fluid.
Normally strainers do require

Normally cyclone separators do periodic preventive Maintenance
require preventive Maintenance checks. Otherwise strainer
checks otherwise finer particles element gets chocked during
reach to the seal faces. The finer course of time and restricts liquid
particles can enter between the seal movement. Such scenario makes
faces and cause damage to the dry run of seal faces and cause
seal. damage to the seal.
Bearing Failure Analysis

Bearing Failure Modes
Major Causes
Root Cause Analysis

(Bearing Failure)
Main Cause Why-Why Analysis ( 1st ) Why-Why Analysis (2nd)
Misalignment 1. Alignment does not take process conditions 1. Improper skill or knowledge on Hot service
2. Excessive piping strain 2. Improper piping / support installation
3. Erratic instrument reading 3. Absence of Instrument Calibration
Oil Contamination 1. Improper personnel skill 1. Lack of awareness or focused training
2. Non-Standard Methods / Oil Handling 2. Not adhering to Standard Procedure / tools
Damage to bearings during 1. Improper use of tools and tackles 1. Not adhering to Standard Procedure
installation shop 2. Use of defective bearing 2. Use of Non-Inspected (by SKF) bearing
Lubrication 1. Improper Lube oil Level 1. Defective bearing isolator / leveler

2. Improper Lube Oil Quality 2. Use of contaminated oil / Handling issue
3. Excessive Cooling or Heating of housing 3. Improper cooling system / Choice of
lubricant / defective oil ring or splasher
Suction pressure variations / 1. Operation outside acceptable range 1. Absence of suction surge vessel
Low flow or Cavitation 2. Operation much lesser than design point 2. Pump too big to handle lower throughput
3. Deviation in operating parameter/ Cavitation 3. Process upset
Overloading 1. Casing distortion 1. Improper pump nozzle load design
2. Improper piping orientation 2. Ignorance or insufficient knowledge
Frequent change over of the 1. Plant follow 15 day cycle it is too frequent to 1. No defined practice available
pump adopt.
Cause Prioritization
(Bearing Failure)
BEARING FAILURE - CAUSE Category Severity Occurrence Detection RPN
Misalignment in Hot condition Method 9 9 9 729
Improper Lubrication – Defective ring or splasher Method 9 9 9 729
Improper Lubrication – Choice of lubricant Method 9 9 9 729
Improper Lubrication – Handling issues Method 9 9 9 729
Frequent Pump Change over -No defined policy Method 9 9 9 729
Lower flow operation – Suction pressure variations Method 9 9 9 729
Incorrect lube oil level - Brg guard/ leveller Method 9 4 8 288
Lower flow operation – Design issues Pers 9 4 8 288
Incorrect lube oil level - Brg guard / leveller Method 9 4 8 288

Cause Validation
(Bearing Failure)
Cause
Mis-Alignment in Hot Condition

&
Mis - Alignment in Hot
Condition
(G11 of CDU)
Mis - Alignment in Hot

Condition (G11 of CDU)
CDU - 001G11**
001G11** -P1H Pump Inboard Horizontal
7
Route Spectrum
09-Apr-10 11:47:31
6 OVERALL= 10.23 V-DG
M
M
RP
RP PK = 10.13
LOAD = 100.0
M
1X
RPM= 2949. (49.16 Hz)

2X
RP
5 3X
PK Velocity in mm/Sec
0
Freq: 2887.5
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 Ordr: .979
Frequency in CPM Spec: 3.385
(132P266B of LOBS)
(Bearing Failure)
Incorrect Oil ring or Splash Disc
• Under - Lubrication
• Poor lube oil circulation
• Improper bearing cooling
• Improper level or overheating
2-3 mm above
• Oil blackening
Oil Level
• Premature bearing failure
Oil ring position as of now in

some of the LOBS Pumps
DMAIC
DEFINE
FM E A –
Pilot So
l’n. 2
IMPROVE MEASU
MASURERE
. Ana.
Cost benefit
. ANALYZE
roi
l. P
So
R
PE
AM
SC
SCAMPER Analysis For Solution Generation

Mechanical Seal Leak
Improper Lower flow

Frequent Pump Change
ROOT CAUSE Improper Seal Flushing Lubrication – operation - lower
over Policy
Defective ring plant throughput
Replace Strainer with Change over with 3 With OIL RING with Replace the pump
Substitute
Cyclone separator month period as pilot splasher disc with lower capacity
Combine
Oil Mist Lubrication Arrange Minimum

Adopt
System Circulation Line
MOC of seal with superior Standby pump warm up Modify / Trim

Modify
seal design procedure - Modify impeller
Use an external flushing New Impeller to suit

Put to use New filtration system
compatible with process Process conditions
Use of open cans / Lower throughput

Eliminate
bottle lubrications operation of unit
Existing pump change Increase Balancing
Rearrange
over policy Hole diameter
SCAMPER Analysis For Solution Generation

Bearing Failure
Improper Lower flow

Frequent Pump Change
ROOT CAUSE Improper Hot Alignment Lubrication – operation - lower
over policy
Defective ring plant throughput
Replace pump with heavy Change over with 3 Replace the pump
Substitute With splasher ring
duty API 610(8th) month period as pilot with lower capacity
Combine all suction

Combine streams into a surge
vessel
Oil Mist Lubrication Arrange Minimum

Adopt Zero Piping stresses
System Circulation Line
Present alignment Standby pump warm up Modify / Trim

Modify
practice procedure - Modify impeller
Ensure vibration data

Always take external help New Impeller to suit
Put to use collection before pump New filtration system
or vendor for support Process conditions
put on load (long C/V)
Use of open cans / Lower throughput

Eliminate
bottle lubrications operation of unit
Correction based on 10 Existing pump change Increase Balancing
Rearrange
min run of the pump. over policy Hole diameter
Solution Prioritization
Matrix
Pumps in Train III / LOBS
Easy to Easy to
Sr. No Solution Generation COST Total
Implement Control
1 Install a suction surge vessel to re-arrange all streams 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
2 Replace existing pumps with sturdier API design pumps 0.4 10.8 5.4 16.6
3 Modify (Trim / balancing hole size etc) / Replace impeller 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
Replace existing lube oil ring with Splasher Disc and use
4 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
filtered lube oil.
Adopt new pump change over policy as a pilot study with a

5 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
period of 3 month duration
Keep constant watch on pump suction conditions all the time

6 0.4 10.8 5.4 16.6
for ensuring positive suction pressure.
Modify existing seal flushing plan from API Plan 11 to API Plan
7 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
32 (external flushing)
8 Always operate pump at designed conditions 0.4 10.8 5.4 16.6

Solution Prioritization
Matrix
Pump in CDU Complex
Easy to Easy to
Sr. No Solution Generation COST Total
Implement Control
Replace existing strainer on seal flushing line with cyclone
1 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
separator.
Modify existing seal flushing plan from API Plan 12 to API Plan
2 0.4 10.8 5.4 16.6
21 (with energy efficient cooler) or Double seal
3 Always use filtered and quality lube oil 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
4 Replace existing lube oil ring with Splasher Disc 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
Adopt new pump change over policy as a pilot study with a

5 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
period of 3 month duration
Modify existing alignment practice by including run alignment

6 1.8 10.8 5.4 18
technique.
Always avail vendor or external help for all overhauls and

7 0.4 10.8 5.4 16.6
installations at site.
8 Always operate pump at designed conditions 0.4 10.8 5.4 16.6

Solution Implementation
Action Plan
SR DESCRIPTION OF SUPPORT
ACTION POINTS BY WHOM BY WHEN
NO SOLUTION REQD
1. Stock Proposal
1. Codification and Stock Completed.
Installation of Cyclone Proposal 2. Procurement action
Separators in place of 2. Procurement and Binning of Rotary Cell / P&CS / initiated.
1
existing strainers – CDU items Area Maintenance 3. Material expected in 6
PUMPS 3. Installation at site weeks.
4. On Job Training on Seals 4. Area wise Training
Jun 2010 – Nov 2010
1. MOC / Drawing Preparation

Conversion of existing
2. Procurement Rotary Cell / LOBS Completed
2 flushing plan 11 into plant 32 LINK
3. Site installation and Maint / Operations
in P266 A/B
commissioning
1. MOC / Drawing Preparation

2. Procurement Action
Installation of suction Surge Rotary Cell / LOBS
3 3. Site installation and By next RMP Shutdown LINK
Vessel – P266A/B Maint / Operations
commissioning
Trim impeller and increase 1. Vendor consultancy Rotary Cell /

4 Completed
balancing hoe dia of P266 2. Modification of impeller Machine shop
1. Study to be completed
1. Study tag wise effect for pump
Adopt 3 month pump by 20.09.2010
change over Rotary Cell / LOBS
5 change over policy on pilot 2. Implementation by
2. Change present process Ops
project 01. 10.2010
3. Implement as a pilot
Solution Tree – Bearing / Seal

Failures
Y REDUCING MAINT INTERRUPTIONS AND INCREASE MTBF OF PUMPS
Lower flow operation Alignment

Frequent pump Improper Improper Seal
PROBLEM / Suction Pressure variations in hot
change over lubrication Flushing
Variations condition
Pump Designed for Use of incorrect Chocking of lines Differential

For checking
higher capacity / splash ring and and limitations in expansion due
ROOTCAUSE integrity of
Multiple suction unfiltered lube direct flushing to high temp
standby pump
streams oil from discharge service
Each start/ stop

Creates reverse Premature Premature Mech
starves seal Substantial
thrust on pump bearing failure seal failure on
EFFECT flushing liquid change in shaft
bearings when pump on account of account of over
and potential for alignment value
operates at low flow overheating heating
seal leak
Replace Plan 12
Replace ring
Modify existing with Plan 31(CDU) Carry out RUN
Modify impeller with splash
pump change / Replace Plan 11 alignment after
SOLUTION Replace pump disc /
over procedure with API Plan 10 min pump
Install filtration
on pilot project 32(RMP) and On run
unit
Job Training
Effort Benefit
Analysis
Install Cyclone separators on flushing line connections in

1
place of strainers – G10/10S/G2/G2S
Modify existing practice of hot alignment and include

2
Run Alignment Technique – G10/11
Trim and increase balancing hole dia of Impeller -

3
132P266 A/B
9, 10, 11
6, 7, 8 Modify existing mechanical seal flushing plan from API
4
Plan 11 with API plan 32 – 132P266 A/B
Adopt 3 month pump change over policy on pilot study in

5
LOBS Unit
Install a suction surge vessel to re-arrange all streams –

6
132P266 A/B
Replace existing Lube oil ring with Splasher Disc – All

7
pumps i.e. G11/G11S/ G10/G10S/ 132P266A&B
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Change existing flushing plans in G11/G11S /

8
G10/G10S with API Plan 21 (installation of Cooler)
9 Always operate pumps at designed conditions
Replace existing pumps considering present operating

10
conditions with sturdier design.
Install double seals in all pumps i.e. G11/G11S/ G10/

11
G10S/ 132P266A&B
DMAIC
FM
CO
EA
N
PL TR
AN OL
DEFINE
2
IMPROVE MEASURE
MASURE
ANALYZE
61
Process Management
Metrics Y=O/P Unit of What to Corrective

Responsibility Periodicity Type of Chart
& X = I/P measure respond action
Y1: Mechanical Analysis of

Nos Rotary Once in Month I Chart Every incident
Seal Failure failure
Temp below
X1: Flushing of Maint Officer / Clean
Temp / Seal Temp / Pressure 160 deg C /
Mechanical Operator / Ops Trend flushing
Pressure once every day Pressure below
Seal Officer circuit
14 Kg/cm2
Pump Flow rates -

Flow / Operate pump
Maint Officer / Daily / Vibration - 15 Monitor
X2: Bearing Vibration / Aspen / at least 60%
Ops Officer / days / LO failure
Loading Lube Oil Vibview BEP & Replace
Rotary Decolourization - symptoms
Condition LO
weekly
Y2: Bearing Analysis of

Nos Rotary Once in Month I Chart Every incident
Failure failure
Pump Flow rates -

Flow / Operate pump
Maint Officer / Daily / Vibration - 15 Monitor
X1: Bearing Vibration / Aspen / at least 60%
Ops Officer / days / LO failure
Loading Lube Oil Vibview BEP & Replace
Rotary Decolourization - symtoms
Condition LO
weekly
X2: Suction Maint Officer / Maintain suction Monitor

pressure Pressure Ops Officer / On every day Aspen above 4.2 failure
variation Rotary Kg/cm2 symptoms
Key Lessons Learned
• Importance of working in Cross-Functional Team

• Concentration on processes rather than isolated events gives
sustained solutions (May be the word process generates Fear
and Resistance).
• Visibility through out the implementation process makes
acceptability of the project by majority.
• DMAIC Methodology as problem solving technique could be
applied to all critical issues.
• Opportunity to practice powerful analytical tools like FMEA,
Cause & Effect, SCAMPER etc.
63
End of Presentation
Thank You
Centrifugal Pump Failure Pattern for

years 2008 & 2009
## Others includes Low Flow / Low pressure / Casing repairs etc.

** Internals like wear ring, shaft shear / Pump seizure / Unbalance etc.
Rotary Recommendations – Category wise
Back to Definitions
Failures
Back 2 Imp
Failures
Modified to API Plan 32
Back 2 Imp
PRESSURE STRAINER
GAUGE
EXTERNAL FLUSH
TO SEAL
ORIFICE
Original Pump Flushing Plan 11

Machinery Reliability Through Root Cause Analysis PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Machinery Reliability Through Root Cause Analysis PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Reducing Maint Interruptions /

Increasing MTBF of Critical Equipment

Start Date : April 2010

Black Belt : Vijay S.Dhonde

Master Black Belt : Naveen Narayanan

Project sponsor : DGM Maintenance

Team Members : K K Nanduri / John Bosco

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

• Focus on reducing variation

• Importance of working in Cross-Functional Team

Present Definition of Failure

Failure starts here

Potential Failure Functionally failed

The inspection and corrective

Maximize interval between Potential Failure and Functional Failure

Equipment not performing

Risk to business (consequence) increase as we move along P-F Curve

Why consider only equipment overhauled at shop for MTBF?

How failure of rotary equipment is recorded?

What base line data is being considered for the analysis?

Notifications or Job generation by Rotary Cell through SAP type M6 is being

Failure Pattern Identification (Equipment

Pumps contribution in failure pattern being higher

Failure Pattern Identification (Complex

Reducing Maintenance Interruptions and Increasing MTBF of Critical Pumps of

Process Owner DGM Maintenance

Start: Condition Monitoring and Notification generation

Metric Baseline Data Current Goal Entitlement

By Reducing MTTR By Improving MTBF

Increase Equipment uptime Reduce No of Failures

Reduce No of Repeat failures

Reduce No of repeat failures or

Availability of Equipment in Operation / Route Readings /

Analysis and Release of type M6

History / Data Updation by Area

Recheck / Condition Monitoring

Process Flow of Notification Generation

Site activities Recommendation Data Analysis

Data (history) Data Collection

DGM Maint X/O

Target Audience Content Frequency Delivery Method

Key Stakeholders as Project Status, Issues, Bi-weekly Status by e-mail

Engineering Team Project Needs, Issues, weekly Co-ordination Meeting.

IMPROVE MEASURE Pareto

Focused pumps for Study

Equipment Failure Cost (in Lakhs) MTBF (Months)

001G10S - CRUDE OIL SEAL 6.8 5.1

001G11S - LONG RES BRG / OTHER 145 4.0

132P266 – EXCS WAXY BRG 36 4.0

Process Sigma for above 3

List of Top 8 Equipments for Study

Equipment Failure COST MTBF

001G11 - LONG RESI BRG 3,394,683 7.2

001G12 - H.G.O. SEAL 533,272 7.2

BRG Bearing Failure

HIGH VIBRATION, PIPING, Internals, Seizure,

SEAL Mechanical Seal Failure

Back Up Slides for Measure Phase

Back ground analysis

Process Capability Index

Number Of actual defects

Defects per opportunity DPO=D/(N*O) 3/(3*16) = 0.042

Process Sigma (From

Defects per opportunity DPO=D/(NO) 3/(316) = 0.042