Smart
selection, purchase
by Drew D. Troyer
In my last column, I
wrote about a proactive method for selecting a lubricant supplier.
Let’s expand that conversation and focus on the process for
purchasing the lubricant. In this column, I’ll explain lubricant
performance properties. Next issue, I’ll explain the mechanics of
creating generic specifications to support its purchase and
management.
While performing
consulting activities, I often ask clients to describe the lubricant
they use in a particular machine and to explain, in technical terms,
why they use it. The most common response to the first question is
“Brand XYZ’s type ABC lubricant.” Brand or product is the most
common method for describing a lubricant. The next most common
response is based upon some common physical property scheme, like the
ISO viscosity grade for oil or the NLGI consistency grade for grease.
However, at its essence, a lubricating oil or grease is a bundle of
performance properties. Neither the brand-based descriptor nor the general physical
property descriptors effectively expresses the lubricant’s
performance properties.
The most common
responses I get to the second (application) question are “we’ve
always used that lubricant” and “the lube salesperson recommended
it.” You have a good match if the product that always is used or is
recommended by the lubricant salesperson possesses the performance
properties to match the machine requirements relative to its operating
application and environment. However, in practice, this isn’t always
the case.
As a result of
changing suppliers over time and ad hoc changes to the lubricant
specification (not always thought-through initiatives), we sometimes
find the lubricant that is in service has drifted away from the
required performance characteristics. This sometimes results in a
subpar lubricant. Other times, we are paying for a bunch of unneeded,
and often very expensive, performance properties. In either case, you
need managerial control.
For the most part,
performance properties are easy to understand. They tend to relate
intuitively to the application’s demands. Take oxidation resistance,
for example. Some base oils resist oxidation better than others.
Certain additives enhance this property; others diminish it. Oxidation
stability is very important in applications where the lubricant is
used for a long period of time. It is not so important for
once-through (total loss) applications or applications where the
lubricant is changed or re-administered frequently.
Other performance
properties commonly used to describe oils include thermal stability,
hydrolytic stability, lubricity (anti-wear/extreme pressure
performance), rust and corrosion protection, demulsibility (separates
form water), emulsibility (doesn’t separate from water),
filterability (passes easily through filter material),
biodegradability, etc.
For greases, evaluate
properties like pumpability, slumpability, water washout resistance,
dropping point, worked stability, bleed and separation resistance,
etc. As with oil, the application should drive grease performance
characteristics, and don’t pay a premium price for unnecessary
characteristics. For instance, in very dry environments, there’s no
reason to pay for excellent water washout resistance.
Notice that the word
“ability” shows up in many performance descriptors? Performance
properties describe the oil’s ability to: protect component surfaces
against mechanical and chemical damage; control, eliminate or
quarantine contamination; be delivered to the required location
without damage; and, resist degradation.
It’s the
performance properties that count. Physical and chemical properties
are only important in as much
as they positively affect performance properties. Brand names are
merely nominal identifiers.
Fortunately, there
are hundreds of standardized tests devised by the American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) and others to help you understand a
lubricant’s performance on one or more of these properties and
compare lubricants to one another.
Because a lubricant
is a bundle of performance properties, not just one, you must
recognize that excellent performance on one criteria can, by
definition, adversely affect the performance on other criteria. For
instance, the physical and chemical properties that produce excellent
demulsibility produce poor emulsibility. Those properties are polar
opposites. Other influences aren’t so obvious. Excellent extreme
pressure performance, for instance, can adversely affect a
lubricant’s ability to resist corrosion of copper-based alloys.
Trade-offs are common.
The moral to the
story? Think of your lubricants as a bundle of performance properties.
s
Drew
Troyer is the senior editor of Machinery Lubrication Magazine. If you
have a lubrication or oil analysis question, contact Coach Troyer at
800-597-5460 or e-mail dtroyer@noria.com.
This
article appeared in the June/July 2004 issue of MRO
Today magazine. Copyright 2004.
Back to top
Back to MRO Coach archives
|