The main engine manufacturers acknowledge that low load ops are leading to a required change in cylinder lube oil management. It is now no longer the simple act of balancing fuel sulphur with Base Number and feed rate. The load and relative temperature of the liner will require monitoring to ensure that conditions are avoided which can cause cold corrosion.
Honing marks removed due to corrosion
IN ALL CASES ROUTINE “CORRECTED” CDO ANALYSIS IS RECOMMENDED
In addition the modern lower BN products may not be ideal in all circumstances – I recommend a thorough review of the CLO management process when working a low load operational policy.
Files are attached for convenience
Wartsila CLO low load RT-148
Wartsila Lubes RT-138
MAN Diesel and Turbo SL2013-571
CLO feed rate optimising proc 2013-05-31
In most industries it is unlikely that your CEO will be very happy if you tweet and facebook via linkedIn every time you encounter a new machinery issue, however it is rare that anyone will be facing problems that have not been faced and solved before.
So to that extent why not impress your CEO and tell everyone about your successes – you will have found many a solution and your team stepped up and made it right. After all your CEO probably signed your employment papers and your company only employs the best people! Right?
In a condition based environment we manage the asset population by a combination of strategies targeted at avoiding unnecessary maintenance. However, failures do occur – we like to call them – anomalies – as they come from nowhere, when we thought we had all bases covered. In reality these “outliers” are to be expected – the measure of our capability is how effectively we learn from them and bring them back into the protected environment so we can minimise their likelihood of reoccurrence and minimise their effect.
As is probably well known to you all, making mistakes and falling down is unavoidable in the real world. We learn from these events and we move on. Repeating mistakes however is unacceptable and we would do better to remember this by ensuring that;
1 – Every time we find an issue and fix it, we make sure that we check other similar systems and confirm that they are protected accordingly.
2 – We ensure that all our systems are setup to automatically capture evidence of similar events – which we may miss – so we can fix them.
3 – We tell our peers to look out for these issues and become active in the community.
Business advantage via reliability enhancements sounds attractive on one level but every time someone is killed or injured because we did not share the knowledge required to fix it – in some way we are all responsible.
This is NOT whistle blowing but professional engineering practice.
See the UK Engineering Council‘s statement on ethics here