September / October 2015 NLGI Spokesman

NLGI

SPOKESMAN

Serving the Grease Industry Since 1933 – VOL. 79, NO. 4, SEPT/OCT 2015

In this issue . . .

7 2015 Award Presentations 16 Highlights from the Meeting 20 Technology to Improve the Grease Making Process 34 Applying Automation to Batch Manufacturing Using Industry Standards 40 Innovative Engineering Design Facilitates Plant Construction

Lubricants formulated with additives from Vanderbilt Chemicals have “SUPERHERO” Performance.

ANTIOXIDANTS VANLUBE® AZ - Zinc diamyldithiocarbamate.

VANLUBE EZ - Zinc diamyldithiocarbamate and diamyl ammonium diamyldithiocarbamate.

VANLUBE NA - Alkylated diphenylamine.

VANLUBE RD - Polymerized TMQ. *VANLUBE 81 - Purified dioctyldiphenylamine.

VANLUBE 887 - Ashless antioxidant synergist. *VANLUBE 961 - Octylated and butylated diphenylamine.

VANLUBE 1202 - Alkylated PANA. *VANLUBE 7723 - Methylene-bis-dibutyldithiocarbamate.

VANLUBE BHC - Phenolic antioxidant.

FRICTION REDUCERS/EP-ANTIWEAR AGENTS MOLYVAN® L - Molybdenum phosphorodithioate.

MOLYVAN 2000 - Sulfurized molybdenum dithiocarbamate.

MOLYVAN 822 - Molybdenum dithiocarbamate. **MOLYVAN 855 - Molybdenum friction reducer/no sulfur, no phosphorus. *VANLUBE 73 - Antimony dithiocarbamate.

VANLUBE 73 Super Plus - Antimony dithiocarbamate & zinc diamyldithiocarbamate. *VANLUBE 829 - Dimercaptothiadiazole (DMTD) dimer.

VANLUBE 869 - Synergistic zinc dithiocarbamate/ sulfurized olefin mixture.

VANLUBE 871 - Ashless multifunctional dimercaptothiadiazole.

VANLUBE 972M - Thiadiazole derivative in a butoxytriglycol polyethylene glycol blend. *VANLUBE 7611M - Ashless phosphorodithioate.

VANLUBE 8610 - Synergistic antimony dithiocarbamate/sulfurized olefin mix. *VANLUBE 9123 - Amine phosphate.

METAL DEACTIVATORS *CUVAN® 303 - Benzotriazole derivative.

CUVAN 826 - Dimercaptothiadiazole derivatives.

NACAP® - Aqueous sodium mercaptobenzothiazole.

VANCHEM® NATD - Aqueous disodium dimercaptothiadiazole.

VANLUBE 601 - Heterocyclic sulfur-nitrogen compound.

VANLUBE 601E - Heterocyclic sulfur-nitrogen compound.

VANLUBE 704S - Barium sulfonate blend.

RUST INHIBITORS *VANLUBE RI-A - Dodecenylsuccinic acid derivative.

VANLUBE RI-G - Fatty acid derivative of imidazoline.

VANLUBE 8912E - Synthetic neutral calcium sulfonate.

hemic ilt C a rb

**

, ls

LLC

UL ®

* NSF® Certified

6 24

1

O

IS

MOLYVAN 3000 - Molybdenum dithiocarbamate.

MOLYVAN FEI Plus - Antioxidant, Antiwear, Friction Reducer Blend VANLUBE W324 - Dialkylammonium Tungstate in oil.

TPS™ 20, 32 & 44 - Polysulfides used for EP applications.

VANLUBE 289 - Borate Ester.

VANLUBE 972 NT - Thiadiazole derivative in a polyalkylene glycol diluent blend, HAPs free.

VANLUBE 996E - Methylene bis(dibutyldithiocarbamate) tolutriazole derivative.

VANLUBE RI-BSN - Neutral Barium Dinonylnaphthalene Sulfonate.

VANLUBE RI-CSN - Neutral Calcium Dinonylnaphthalene Sulfonate.

VANLUBE RI-ZSN - Neutral Zinc Dinonylnaphthalene Sulfonate.

Van de

NEW PRODUCTS

90

0 1:2

008 100

0

We have over 50 lubricant additives available to meet your specific requirements. Our technical staff can also custom-develop products for you.

Registered and pending trademarks appearing in these materials are those of R.T. Vanderbilt Holding Company, Inc. or its respective wholly owned subsidiaries. For complete listings, please visit this location for trademarks, www.rtvanderbiltholding.com. NSF is a registered trademark of NSF International. UL is a registered trademark of UL LLC. TPS is a trademark of Arkema, Inc. Before using any of these products, read and comply with the information contained in the MSDS, label and other product literature.

VICE-PRESIDENT:

Bruce M. Urban FMC-Lithium Division 2801 Yorkmont Rd., Ste. 300 Charlotte, NC 28208

David Como Dow Corning Corp.

P.O. Box 0994 Midland, MI 48686

SECRETARY:

TREASURER:

Kim Smallwood Citgo Petroleum Corp.

1293 Eldridge Pkwy.

Houston, TX 77077

Joe Kaperick Afton Chemical Corporation 500 Spring St. Richmond, VA 23218-2158

PAST-PRES./ADVISORY:

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:

Chuck Coe Grease Technology Solutions LLC 7010 Bruin Ct. Manassas, VA 20111

Kimberly Hartley NLGI International Headquarters 249 SW Noel, Suite 249 Lee’s Summit, MO 64063

DIRECTORS Barbara Bellanti Battenfeld Grease & Oil Corp. of NY P.O. Box 728 • 1174 Erie Ave. N. Tonawanda, NY 14120-0728 Richard Burkhalter Covenant Engineering Services 140 Corporate Place Branson, MO 65616 Faith Corbo King Industries, Inc. Science Road Norwalk, CT 06852 Gary Dudley Exxon Mobil Corporation 3225 Gallows Road Room 7C1906 Fairfax, VA 22037 Gian L. Fagan Chevron Lubricants 100 Chevron Way Room 71-7338 Richmond, CA 94802-0627 Jim Hunt Tiarco Chemical 1300 Tiarco Drive Dalton, GA 30720 Tyler Jark Lubricating Specialties Co. 8015 Paramount Blvd.

Pico Rivera, CA 90660 Dr. Anoop Kumar Royal Manufacturing Co., LP 516 S, 25th West Ave. Tulsa, Oklahoma 74127 Wayne Mackwood Chemtura 199 Benson Rd. Middlebury, CT 06749

Dennis Parks Texas Refinery Corp.

One Refinery Place Ft. Worth, TX 76101 Tom Schroeder Axel Americas, LLC P.O. Box 12337 Kansas City, MO 64116 Raj Shah Koehler Instrument Co. 85 Corporate Dr. Holtsville, NY 11716-1796 Dr. Huafeng “Bill” Shen Bel-Ray Co. P.O. Box 526 Farmingdale, NJ 07727 Terry Smith Lubrication Engineers, Inc. P.O. Box 16447 Wichita, KS 67216 Thomas W. Steib The Elco Corporation 1000 Belt Line Street Cleveland, OH 44109 Lisa Tocci Lubes ’n’ Greases 6105 Arlington Blvd., Suite G Falls Church, VA 22044 William (Bill) Ward The Lubrizol Corporation 29400 Lakeland Blvd.

Mail Drop 051E Wickliffe, OH 44092 Ruiming “Ray” Zhang R.T. Vanderbilt Company, Inc. 30 Winfield St. Norwalk, CT 06855

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS:

CHAIR, SESSION PLANNING:

Joe Kaperick Afton Chemical Corporation 500 Spring St. Richmond, VA 23218-2158

Joe Kaperick Afton Chemical Corporation 500 Spring St. Richmond, VA 23218-2158

David Turner 22110 Stone Cross Court Katy, TX 77450

SERVICE INDUSTRY ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE CHAIR: Jim Hunt Tiarco Chemical 1300 Tiarco Drive Dalton, GA 30720

EDITORIAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Joe Kaperick Afton Chemical Corporation 500 Spring St. Richmond, VA 23218-2158

SPOKESMAN

Serving the Grease Industry Since 1933 – VOL. 79, NO. 4, SEPT/OCT 2015

4 President’s Podium 5 Call for Papers 7 2015 Award Presentations 10 The 31st Annual Fun Run 11 Golf Tournament 12 2015 Platinum Sponsors 16 Highlights from the 82nd NLGI Annual Meeting

20 Technology to Improve the Grease Making Process

By Gareth Fish, PhD CLS CLGS and Chris Hsu, PhD The Lubrizol Corporation, Wickliffe, Ohio, USA

33 Advertiser’s Index 34 Applying Automation to Batch Manufacturing Using Industry Standards

By Bruce Jensen & Marcus Tennant Yokogawa Corporation of America, Sugarland, TX

Dwaine (Greg) Morris Shell Lubricants 526 S. Johnson Drive Odessa, MO 64076

CHAIR:

NLGI

OFFICERS PRESIDENT:

40 INNOVATIVE ENGINEERING DESIGN FACILITATES PLANT CONSTRUCTION

By Richard Burkhalter Covenant Engineering Services, LLC., Branson, Missouri, USA

ON THE COVER Highlights from the 82nd Annual Meeting. See page 16.

Published bi-monthly by NLGI. (ISSN 0027-6782) KIMBERLY HARTLEY, Editor NLGI International Headquarters 249 SW Noel, Suite 249, Lee’s Summit, MO 64063 USA Phone (816) 524-2500, FAX: (816) 524-2504 Web site: http://www.nlgi.org — E-mail: nlgi@nlgi.org One-year subscriptions: U.S.A. $65.00; Canada $80.00; International $109.00; Airmail $147.00. Claims for missing issues must be made within six months for foreign subscribers and three months for domestic. Periodicals postage paid at Kansas City, MO. The NLGI Spokesman is indexed by INIST for the PASCAL database, plus by Engineering Index and Chemical Abstracts Service. Microfilm copies are available through University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, MI. The NLGI assumes no responsibility for the statements and opinions advanced by contributors to its publications. Views expressed in the editorials are those of the editors and do not necessarily represent the official position of NLGI. Copyright 2015, NLGI. Postmaster: Send address corrections to the above address.

PRESIDENT’S PODIUM

President’s Podium Welcomes

David Como

76th President

We enthusiastically announce the election of Mr. David Como as the 76th President for NLGI in his interim role ἀlling in for his predecessor, Mr. Bruce Urban. A Mechanical Engineer from Northeastern University, Dave spent the ἀrst 8 years of his career in production-related engineering and supervisory roles with both the Dow Chemical Company and Dow Corning Corporation. He became involved with Dow Corning’s Lubricants Business in 1985 and held a variety of technical service, development and leadership roles within the lubricants business.

Retiring in 2009, Dave was a senior member of the Global Development Leadership Team for Dow Corning Corporation’s Molykote® lubricants business, representing the Americas Area and was responsible for Molykote’s Solid Lubricants Technology globally.

Among other things, he was called “Associate Scientist” at time of retirement and is currently representing Dow Corning as “Scientist Emeritus” on the NLGI Board of Directors.

Comments from the new President: As I related to the NLGI Board in September, I am truly honored by this appointment and will strive to ἀll the sizeable shoes left by our out outgoing president, Bruce Urban, as well as the legacy left by his predecessors since 1933. The integrity of NLGI is a time-honored tradition in industry that is global in its reach. Our strength is in that tradition and what I have felt to be a truly supportive brotherhood since my initiation to the institute in the mid 1980’s. It is to that brotherhood and the relationships it spawns that I will

dedicate my tenure as your president – truly welcoming new people, instructors, speakers, and companies to our organization as I was made welcome those (few) years ago. I also feel a unique camaraderie with our sister organizations, ELGI and the NLGI India Chapter which will continue to blossom – particularly since current leadership of the three organizations truly see “eye-toeye”.

Our current undertakings include a focused initiative to strengthen our Long Range Plan and our committee overseeing that plan and to completely update our Constitution and By-Laws. In addition, although our 2015 NLGI Annual Meeting in Coeur d’Alene will be hard to top (or even match!), the board has been really looking forward to 2016! On June 11th thru 14th, we will head east to celebrate our 83rd annual meeting AND the 250th anniversary of The Homestead Resort in Hot Springs Virginia when our theme will be: “Revolutions in Grease: Changing Technology for Changing Times”.

I ENTHUSIASTICALLY look forward to serving the NLGI membership and encourage each of you to provide feedback and suggestions openly with me, the board members or Kim Hartley or her capable staff, Marilyn and Denise.

Simply, Dave Como

-4VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

Call for Papers – NLGI 83rd Annual Meeting A call is hereby issued for technical papers for presentation at the NLGI 83rd Annual Meeting, which will be held at The Omni Homestead, Hot Springs, VA, USA from June 11th - 14th 2016. You do not need to be an NLGI member in order to present a technical paper at our Annual Meeting. ἀ e NLGI 83rd Annual Meeting theme is: ‘Revolutions in Grease - Changing Technology for Changing Times’ Therefore, we would be looking for papers that Challenge the existing way of thinking with: • New thickeners • New additives • New or improved test methods • New applications • New or improved manufacturing techniques • All to fit into an ever-changing regulatory environment Papers covering any other phase of grease chemistry, grease formulation or grease manufacturing technology are also welcomed.

Technical papers approved for presentation at the Annual Meeting may be published in the NLGI Spokesman, after evaluation by the NLGI Editorial Review Committee.

COMMERCIAL PAPERS: NLGI will also accept up to 4 papers of a commercial nature. One presentation of a commercial paper will be held at the beginning of each of our 4 Technical Sessions during the NLGI Annual Meeting and will not conflict with any other presentations or events. Commercial papers will be accepted on a ἀrst come, ἀrst served basis. (A fee of $750 will be charged for all commercial papers accepted for presentation.)

You may download the Author Information and Author Instructions/Deadlines forms for your technical presentation, as well as the Commercial Presentation Application form, on our website: https://www.nlgi.org/call-for-papers If you are interested in submitting a technical or commercial paper for presentation, please send your name, contact information and abstract to: Marilyn Brohm - Marilyn@nlgi.org NLGI INTERNATIONAL OFFICE 249 SW Noel St. • Suite 249 • Lee’s Summit, MO 64063 USA. Phone 816-524-2500 • FAX 816-524-2504

Good News.

Thought provoking and thorough reporting is at your fingertips.

LUBES’N’GREASES MAGAZINE Covering the global issues, trends and news that affect your success

LUBES’N’GREASES EUROPE-MIDDLE EAST-AFRICA MAGAZINE Offering a focused look at EMEA, Russia and India

LUBE REPORT A weekly round-up of trending industry news and base oil price reports Reaches 139 countries and is translatable into 80 languages

LUBE REPORT ASIA A free weekly e-newsletter for and about the lubricant industry in Asia. Featuring breaking news and base oil price reports in English and Simplified Chinese

GET YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS TODAY www.LubesnGreases.com

LNG-GOODNEWS-SPOKES-2015-FP.indd 1

12/10/14 6:23 PM

2015 Awards Presentations The Awards Committee has made selections for 2015 awards for the following:

Mr. David Turner - Shell Global Solutions (US) Inc.

NLGI Achievement Award

Presented by: Mr. Dennis Parks, NLGI Awards Committee Chair

Mr. Chuck Coe - Grease Technology Solutions LLC

NLGI Fellows Award

Presented by: Mr. Dennis Parks, NLGI Awards Committee Chair

-7NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

6:23 PM

2015 Awards Presentations

Mr. Terry Smith - Lubrication Engineers Inc.

John A. Bellanti Sr. Memorial Award

Presented by: Mr.Dennis Parks, NLGI Awards Committee Chair

Mr. Edward Oravec - Shell Canada Ltd.

NLGI Honorary Membership

Presented by: Mr. Dennis Parks, NLGI Awards Committee Chair

Mr. Bill Tuszynski - Ivanhoe Industries, Inc.

Clarence E. Earl Memorial Award

FROM: Mr. Jon Arnson, Rockwood Lithium (Award Sponsor)

Mr. Paul Bertin - Elevance Renewable Sciences

NLGI Author Award – Development

FROM: Mr. Bill Mallory, Royal Manufacturing (Award Sponsor)

Mr. Gaston Agulair - Aἀon Chemical

NLGI Author Award - Application

FROM: Mr. Gian Fagan, Chevron Global Lubricants (Award Sponsor)

Dick Burkhalter - Covenant Engineering Services Inc.

NLGI Award for Educational Excellence FROM: Dwain (Greg) Morris, Shell Lubricants (Award Sponsor)

The 31st Annual Fun Run Sponsored by FMC-Lithium Division

2015 Fun Run Winners Men Gold: Felipe Smith, SQM North America Corp.

Silver: Vince Vasely, Vanderbilt Chemicals Bronze: John Sander, Lubricating Engineers Inc. Women Gold: Jennifer Sanford, FMC - Lithium Division Silver: Susan Gardner, Kluber Lubrication North America L.P. Bronze: Annie Jarquin, Malik PIMS (PIMS Associates Ltd.) Winners received their medals at the Tuesday Night Festival

Mr. Bruce Urban, FMC-Lithium Division.

Thanks for always putting on such a great event!

- 10 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

GOLF TOURNAMENT Sponsored by CITGO Petroleum Corporation

1st Place Low Net Mr. Gary de Gala Mr. Phil Devillebichot Ms. Barbara Buck Mr. Jack Baumstark Jr.

2nd Place Low Net Mr. Choon Noi Lim Mr. David Garza Mr. Mike Adams Mr. Kevin Kvasnicka

1st Place Low Gross Mr. Alex Kocin Mr. John Lorimor Mr. Bill Dominick Mr. Matt Hardy

2nd Place Low Gross Mr. Jon Arnson Mr. Jeff Davis Mr. Seki Keiji Mr. Ron Balmain

Mr. Kim Smallwood, CITGO Petroleum Corporation

Platinum Sponsors

Monday Continental Breakfast Co-Sponsor Closing Festival Decor Co-Sponsor Industry Speaker Sponsor Welcoming Reception Co-Sponsor

Final Program Guide Sponsor

Keynote Speaker Co-Sponsor Saturday Evening Reception Co-Sponsor

Golf Tournament Sponsor

- 12 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

Closing Festival Entertainment Co-Sponsor

Photographer Co-Sponsor Saturday Evening Reception Co-Sponsor Closing Festival Dinner Co-Sponsor

Fun Run Sponsor Welcoming Reception Co-Sponsor Saturday Evening Reception Co-Sponsor

- 13 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

Audio Visual Co-Sponsor Education Course Binders Sponsor

Refreshments Breaks Co-Sponsor

Platinum Sponsors

Monday Continental Breakfast Co-Sponsor Saturday Evening Reception Co-Sponsor

Saturday Evening Reception Co-Sponsor Closing Festival Dinner Co-Sponsor Mobile Meeting App Sponsor

Saturday Evening Reception Co-Sponsor Golf Four Caddy Co-Sponsor Golf Breakfast Co-Sponsor

Refreshments Breaks Co-Sponsor

Saturday Evening Reception Co-Sponsor Closing Festival Dinner Co-Sponsor Opening Entertainment Co-Sponsor Welcoming Reception Co-Sponsor

- 14 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

INTRODUCING

GREASE

IN THE UNCOMPROMISING WORLD OF INDUSTRIAL, WHERE METAL MEETS METAL - HIGH LOADS, CORROSION AND CONTAMINATION RARELY RELENT. THAT’S WHERE AFTON’S GREASE MICROBOTZ™ SMOOTH THE WAY. PROTECTING EQUIPMENT, PREVENTING WEAR, AND PROLONGING THE LIFE OF INDISPENSABLE MACHINERY WHERE CONDITIONS ARE AT THEIR HARSHEST. AFTON’S BROAD RANGE OF MULTIFUNCTIONAL GREASE ADDITIVE PACKAGES AND COMPONENTS KEEP GREASE FORMULATION SIMPLE; MAKING COMPLEX, MULTI-INVENTORY MANUFACTURING A THING OF THE PAST, AND GRANTING MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY FOR PRODUCERS OF SPECIALIZED GREASES. THE GREASE MICROBOTZ™ WORK HARD SO YOU DON’T HAVE TO. CUSHIONING THE GRIND OF HEAVY LOADS. KEEPING WEAR, CORROSION AND CONTAMINATION AT BAY. BEARING DOWN ON BEARING DAMAGE, AND GIVING BOTH GREASE MANUFACTURERS AND CONSUMERS PEACE OF MIND. UNRIVALLED ALLIES. ALWAYS PROTECTING. ALWAYS FIGHTING. ALWAYS THERE.

www.aftonmicrobotz.com

- 15 -

© 2015. Afton Chemical Corporation is a whollySEPTEMBER/OCTOBER owned subsidiary of NewMarket Corporation (NYSE:NEU).

NLGI SPOKESMAN, 2015 AFTON®, HiTEC®, MicrobotzTM and Passion for Solutions® are trademarks owned by Afton Chemical Corporation. Passion for Solutions® is a registered trademark in the United States.

- 16 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

Highlights from the NLGI 82nd Annual Meeting

- 17 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

Highlights from the NLGI 82nd Annual Meeting

Technology to Improve the Grease Making Process

By Gareth Fish, PhD CLS CLGS and Chris Hsu, PhD The Lubrizol Corporation, Wickliffe, Ohio, USA

Abstract

The process to manufacture grease is as important to grease properties as are the base oil, thickener, and the additives used to enhance performance. Grease producers manufacture greases using a wide variety of processes. This can be attributed to the availability of the basic raw materials for grease making and differences in the plant and equipment. Provided that the response of each variable is known, grease making is a controlled acid / base chemical reaction process. Grease makers strive to optimize their process for each thickener type based upon an understanding of the process variables.

This paper will discuss technologies that can enable grease producers to improve and enhance their grease making process. The technologies under discussion are additives to: improve the grease yield without compromising the general properties of the grease; reduce oil bleed at both storage and elevated temperatures; and enhance the dropping points of lithium soap thickened greases. Also discussed are methods to reliably manufacture high dropping point lithium complex greases in a variety of base oils, including vegetable oils and synthetic esters.

Introduction

The process to manufacture grease is as important to grease properties as are the base oil, thickener, and the additives used to enhance the performance properties

(1). Grease producers manufacture greases using a wide variety of processes in a wide variety of equipment.

This can be attributed to the availability of the basic raw materials for grease making and differences in the plant and equipment. According to the EGLI REACH Consortium (2) >30 types of lithium soap greases were registered by grease makers both within the European Union and by multi-national lubricant companies. The essentials of grease making have not changed since the days of Klemgard (3). One or more fatty acids are reacted with a slight excess of base or bases, to produce a salt or salts and water. The water is stripped out and the saponiἀcation reaction is ἀnished by the application of additional heat. For simple soaps it is typically desirable to fully melt the simple soap followed by recrystallization to achieve optimum properties, and for complex greases that the reaction is driven to or as close to completion as possible, as the more complete the reaction is the better the thickening and typically, the higher the dropping point.

Over the decades there have been numerous NLGI papers and presentations on how to improve the grease making process. Some focused on improved manufacturing plant and equipment, such as Graham, et. al. (4) and Krol (5); while other papers have covered improved processing techniques for lithium greases such as Polishuk (6) and more recently, Morgan et. al. (7).

- 20 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

One of the challenges outlined by Morgan was that it is diἀc ult to control both 1-step and 2-step reactions to make high dropping point lithium complex greases.

Several papers have focused on components which can be added to the grease manufacturing process to improve the output. Nolan and Zeitz (8) outlined the use of micronized lithium dispersions to improve the reactivity of the lithium hydroxide and Lorimor (9) discussed dropping point enhancers. Both of these topics will be discussed and updated later in the paper.

What is clear from these papers and the authors’ own experiences is grease makers will optimize their process based on their own equipment. Grease makers strive to optimize their process for each thickener type based on understanding of the process variables. Provided that the response of each variable is known, grease making is a controlled acid / base chemical reaction process.

It is known that from a manufacturing perspective, commodity charging of raw materials makes the process easier to manage. If consistent, high quality fatty and complexing acids are used, batch sizes can be defined around a whole number of bags of acid into the cooking vessel. High purity bases also need to be used along with a post-saponification titration to confirm the desired basicity has been achieved. If the acids and bases used are not so consistent, commodity charging typically results in a more variable grease output. Either from supplier certificates or their own laboratory analyses, the saponification numbers of the acids are used to make adjustments to the charging. Many grease makers use calculators to determine the amount of base needed to neutralize the added acids and this improves the consistency of grease batches.

market (10). This is a significant simplification of the actual regional volumes, and to understand the need for improved technology these volumes need to be looked at regionally. In the mature market of North America, lithium complex makes up almost 40% compared to 28% for simple lithium soaps. By contrast, in India, simple lithium soaps dominate the market approaching 85% with complexes only at around 7%. As a developing market, the Chinese market consists of 70% simple lithium and 15% lithium complex thickeners. Europe and Japan match the global average of simple lithium soap greases but manufacture lower percentages of lithium complex greases. In Europe, the difference is made up largely by a higher market share of aluminum complex greases, and in Japan the majority of high temperature greases utilize urea thickeners.

Reviewing regional volumes it is clear that in North America, the growing volume is lithium complex with simple lithium embracing the commodity market. There is a perceived need to improve the properties of lithium complex greases in the following areas: water resistance; oxidation stability and longer grease life; and improved bleed. Oxidation stability and life improvements have been previously presented (11) and polymer technologies are available to improve water resistance (12). In addition to these properties, dropping points above 280 °C are now common with some customers requesting thickener systems that have consistently high dropping points above 300 °C, trying to match the behavior of calcium sulfonate greases. High quality, high temperature thickeners in sensitive base oils are also required for the growing demand in specialty fluids and for bio-based greases.

Grease making equipment includes traditional open kettles, autoclaves and other pressurized reactors and continuous grease making units. For each of these types of manufacturing, individual recipes are needed as well as process control plans and procedures to ensure high quality and consistent output.

Yield improver technologies offer a means to take cost out of simple lithium grease production, by increasing volume manufactured at a given consistency per unit of soap. For markets such as India or China, technologies to improve simple lithium greases are more important today. For a few specialized applications, improved lithium complex greases are also desired.

The largest volume of grease thickeners sold globally are lithium soaps with around 58% based on simple soaps and lithium complexes at around 19% of the global

This paper will discuss technologies that can enable grease producers to improve and enhance their grease making process. For simple lithium greases,

- 21 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

saponiἀcation aides are outlined which improve grease yield without compromising the general properties of the grease.

Additives to control bleed are also discussed. It was previously shown (12) that the incorporation of polymers into grease could reduce both storage bleed and that which occurred in service up to 100 °C. One of the issues with using polymers is that above 100 °C most of the polymers employed start to lose their effectiveness and other solutions are needed.

Technology to improve the dropping point of simple lithium soap greases was previously outlined by Lorimor (9). Two different approaches were illustrated which worked in slightly different ways to enhance the dropping points of lithium soap thickened greases. One ongoing issue is it can be a challenge to consistently manufacture high dropping point lithium complex greases. Both one step and two step processes are used. The one step process can be difficult to control, with batches often giving good yields but with scatter in the resulting dropping points. The two step process reliably will produce dropping points of 260 to 280 °C, but based on current targets of 280 to > 300 °C may not be good enough, and other methods to reliably manufacture high dropping point lithium complex greases in a variety of base oils provide an alternative.

Yield Improvers

the grease making process. One of the features sought by grease producers is the lowest possible soap content to achieve the desired consistency grade. It has been well documented that greases manufactured using naphthenic base oils have lower soap contents compared to those manufactured using paraffinic oils (1), but typically grease quality naphthenic oils are higher cost than paraffinic oils of the same viscosity class. Supply of naphthenic oils is also an issue with only a limited number of suppliers and in some developing markets, quality naphthenic oils are difficult to obtain.

Improved yields can also be obtained by slow cooling from top temperature to below 170 °C. This creates large ἀbers that thicken the oil better but give higher oil bleed and worse shear and roll stability, compared to grease that has undergone a quench or partial quench.

Grease yield improvers are shown to reduce the amount of soap necessary to achieve a penetration target when using purely paraffinic oils. According to the NLGI Grease Guide (1), yield is deἀned as “The amount of grease (of a given consistency) that can be produced from a speciἀc amount of thickening agent.” To the nongrease chemistry professional, this deἀnition is slightly difficult to comprehend. An explanation is given in table 1, with two greases with the same penetration, but different soap contents. Grease B has a 15.4% better yield than grease A.

Based on the increasing commoditization of lithium greases, cost becomes a very important consideration in

- 22 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

The basic target was to reduce the amount of soap with an additive or component added at a low treat level, which would have a net treat cost lower than adding additional soap. Reducing the soap content should also improve the pumpability of the grease but give similar shear and roll stability. It was also desired to have no effect on oil bleed and no negative effects on all other grease properties. Based on current grease and patent literature, there are two routes to improving yield.

The ἀrst involves the use of polymers to increase the unworked and worked penetration of the grease and the second incorporates structure modiἀers into the soap matrix.

The ἀrst approach was to examine commercially available polymers sold as yield improver additives.

These were incorporated into lithium soap greases at the suggested treat rates and tested. The results for the various polymers in group II oil are included in table 2. Based on the data in table 2, polymers can improve grease yield based on reducing the soap content to achieve the same level of worked penetration. Following a review of the data obtained they did not appear to be the complete answer as the cost position was not signiἀcantly improved over the grease without yield improver and some of the “no harms” data collected suggested that the solution may have not been robust.

Looking at general processing for greases, it was thought that better milling could be investigated as part of the study. Three different milling techniques: triple roller with adjustable speeds and gaps, a colloidal mill and a high pressure homogenizer were available. Two slightly different lithium complex soap greases were milled using all three techniques and the milling quality compared in table 3.

Results from analyzing the data suggested that better milling and dispersing could bring improvements to the yield. From this it was thought that adding a dispersant to the grease would improve the milling process. Several commercial dispersants were tried at the same treat rate and all caused signiἀcant softening of the grease compared to grease without dispersant. Some examples are shown in table 4.

From this, a few other compounds were tested, most of which did not work, but one candidate showed some potential in initial trials. To further explore this, a series of four simple lithium 12-hydroxystearate greases were made up in API group I paraffinic base oil, using an identical saponiἀcation process but with different soap contents, ranging from 5.6 to 9.3%. These samples are plotted in ἀgure 1, showing that for a similarly controlled saponiἀcation in the same base oil, soap content follows worked penetration. Two greases were then made up using the new yield improver treated at 1%. The ἀrst grease had a soap content of 5.5% but gave a worked penetration of 285 and the second had a soap content of 7.5% with a worked penetration of 252. This data is also plotted on ἀgure 1. There are two ways of looking at the data. The grease with 5.5% thickener and yield improver reduced the penetration by approximately 30 points or the soap content by 2% and the grease with 7.5% thickener and yield improver reduced the penetration by approximately 30 points or the soap content by 2%.

Following on from this three series of greases were made up. The ἀrst repeated the initial experiments in API group I oil; the second series investigated the behavior in group II oil; and the ἀnal series looked at group III oils. Testing was carried out on the greases made with and without the yield improver in the three families of oils to check for negative influences. This is typically called “No harms” testing. The test data for the group I base oil (110 mm2/s at 40 °C) grease is in Table 5, group II oil (115 mm2/s at 40 °C) in table 6, and group III oil (8 mm2/s at 100 °C) results are in table 7.

- 24 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

- 25 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

Two larger scale kettle batches were manufactured in a pilot kettle. They used the same Group I base oil as the greases reported in table 4 and identical 7.54% soap. The grease with the yield improver was 28 penetration points stiffer than without it. Scanning electron micrographs of the grease structures were taken to see if there was any difference between the structures of the grease with and without the yield improver.

As seen in ἀgure 2, the grease with the yield improver has a much ἀner structure and is better dispersed than the grease sample without the yield improver.

- 26 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

Reviewing all the properties tested, work has shown that by adding a small amount of yield improver additive to simple lithium soap greases, the amount of soap necessary to get the same consistency is reduced without negatively impacting the existing physical properties of the grease. As summarized in table 8 below, the major effects were on yield and this, in turn, improved bleed and washout. The API group I based grease had the best improvement in properties. In the group III based grease, the effects were light to not signiἀcant.

Bleed reducing additives

It had been reported that styrene-diene polymers (11), such as styrene-butadiene (SBR) and styreneisoprene (SIP) showed improvement in reducing bleed in lithium soap thickeners in API group I paraffinic oil, compared to other typical oleἀn co-polymers (OCP) or polyisobutylene (PIB) tackiἀers.

The OCP materials are typically marketed as base oil fortiἀers, bleed improvers and components capable of delivering enhanced water resistance. A simple lithium soap base grease with a paraffinic base oil having a viscosity of 120 mm2/s at 40 °C was used to examine the performance of the polymers.

As can be seen from Table 9, the different polymers gave varying results in the three tests with the PIB giving the lowest bleed but the SIP giving the best overall performance. However at temperatures above 120°C, these polymer bleed reduction and control additives did not work and other solutions are needed. Waynick (13) described the use of both organic and inorganic boron containing additives for reducing higher temperature bleed at temperatures up to 175 °C in urea thickened greases. This work was built on by Lorimor (9), who showed that borate additives also work in lithium greases to reduce bleed at higher temperatures. The base grease used in this study was an ISO VG 150 paraffinic base oil blend.

- 27 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

Two new polymers were obtained, which claimed better bleed reduction properties than the original SIP investigated, and incorporated into a variety of different base greases at different treat rates. The group II oil base grease had an oil viscosity of 12 mm2/s at 100 °C, the group II 8 mm2/s at 100 °C. The greases were tested for ASTM D6184 bleed at 150 °C. The results of these tests are shown in table 11.

The data for the two new polymer additives shows clearly that polymer solutions are now available to reduce bleed at temperatures up to 150 °C in group II oils and PAO 6, but nothing is very effective in API group III oils. When initially tested in the group III oils, it was thought that the effect of low viscosity caused the very high bleed, but the lower viscosity PAO 6 gave better bleed characteristics.

Dropping point enhancers

Dropping point enhancers are used in one of two ways. They can be applied to simple lithium soap greases to increase the dropping point by up to 100 °C or they can be added to a “failed” low dropping point lithium complex grease to restore the dropping point. Traditionally, low molecular weight borate esters were used, but other components to do this are now available. Lorimor (9) described and reviewed various boron chemistries that are available. Based on the data presented, borate esters are the most effective way to deliver dropping point enhancement. However, borate esters are not without issue. Hydrolytic stability can be an issue and they can release alcohols and boric acid, which is an environmental concern in some markets. The alcohols give rise to subjective odors, which may be undesirable. A new odorless borate additive has now been developed that also has enhanced hydrolytic stability and responds similarly to the incorporation of zinc dithiophosphate. Comparative data for this and the other borates is summarized in table 12.

Lithium hydroxide dispersions

Many grease end-users now specify dropping points for lithium complex greases above 280 °C. This target is difficult to achieve with conventional processes. It was previously demonstrated that by using anhydrous micronized dispersions of lithium hydroxide in oil, the grease making process can be improved (8). Further work has shown that consistently high dropping points above 300 °C can be achieved in conventional base fluids using this technology to make complex 12-hydroxystearate soaps, with both azelaic and sebacic acids as the complexing agent. A series of greases were made using an ISO VG 220 group I paraffinic oil blend test in a laboratory open kettle system. The target alkalinity was 0.05 to 0.06% LiOH and the recipes were designed to make 1 kg of grease.

- 29 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

A lithium complex grease using a 1-step process with lithium hydroxide monohydrate powder provided inconsistent results compared to making the grease using the same base oil and acids with the lithium dispersion.

The data summarized in table 13 shows that the complex grease made using the lithium hydroxide dispersion gave higher dropping points than the complex grease made using lithium hydroxide monohydrate powder and a 2-step process. This outcome provides the grease manufacturer with a tool to improve the dropping point consistency of lithium complex greases and potentially extract greater value from the complex grease process.

Sensitive base oils

Historically, it was only possible to use pre-formed simple calcium or lithium soaps to thicken water sensitive base oils. Preformed calcium anhydrous (12-hydroxystearate) soaps will give grease dropping points of 140 – 150 °C and those of pre-formed lithium stearate or 12-hydroxystearate will give grease dropping points of 180 to 200 °C, but these ranges are somewhat dependent on the base oils, especially if exotic fluids with signiἀcantly different polarities and solvencies compared to mineral oils are used. At the NLGI Annual Meeting in 2000, Polishuk (6) revisited using preformed soaps and later Bessette (14) outlined how to use preformed soaps “Dry Technology” to make greases with preformed simple thickeners in a variety of different base oils.

Honary (15) outlined several manufacturing techniques methods that could be used to develop greases in temperature and water sensitive vegetable oils, including

the use of preformed soaps, soap concentrates, lithium hydroxide dispersions and heating by microwave technology. Honary explored the various issues with the different ways of making grease in sensitive base oils. Preformed soaps still have to be heated to melt the soap and are not readily available as complexes. Soap concentrates and the lithium hydroxide dispersions worked well but introduced mineral oils or nonbiodegradable synthetic fluids into the grease. The microwave heating technology was reported as being able to drive the saponiἀcation reaction quickly and heat the grease up to melting temperatures without degradation. At the time, microwave heating technology was chosen but later work showed that there were issues with the microwave heating technology (16). Further development of the anhydrous lithium hydroxide dispersion technology showed that it could make high quality lithium complex greases directly in water sensitive base oils (17), and that the only viable option to make high quality greases in sensitive base oils was to use anhydrous lithium dispersions.

As part of the development of the technology, a series of sensitive base oils was selected to see if the lithium dispersion technology was capable of making high quality lithium thickeners directly in the base fluid. The properties of the ἀve base fluids chosen soybean oil, canola oil, high oleic sunflower oil, estolide and synthetic diester are compared in table 14 along with those of a 600N API group I mineral oil, which was used as the control.

- 30 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

The anhydrous lithium hydroxide dispersion technology, as outlined by Nolan and Zeitz (8), is ideally suited to make grease in water and thermally sensitive base oils. The small particle size (<10 µm) allows the lithium hydroxide to react very quickly with the two acids. The only water present is from the saponiἀcation reaction and it is easily removed with minimal hydrolysis of the base oil. The process is also much quicker than conventional lithium complex grease manufacturing.

In normal or traditional manufacturing, as the lithium complex structure is formed, the thickener traps unreacted alkali and acids components in the matrix and prevents complete reaction. The micronized lithium hydroxide dispersion technology involves small, more reactive particles of lithium hydroxide in a homogeneous reaction phase. As a result, a more complete saponiἀcation of lithium complex bases is observed.

The net result of both of these effects is a high quality complex thickener. The absence of water normally used as co-medium of the soap forming mixture minimizes potential of hydrolysis of base fluid ester function and eliminates foaming associated with long water removal.

Reviewing the European LuSC (17), lithium 12-hydroxystearate is useable as a greases thickener for bio-greases as is dilithium sebacate, up to a prescribed limit. Dilithium azelate can be used to thicken sensitive and bio-based oils, but it is listed as having aquatic toxicity and is not useable in Ecolabel greases and therefore vessel general permit (VGP) greases. From this it is clear that making a grease with 12-hydroxystearic acid and sebacic acid below the permitted limit could potentially be used to make high dropping point Ecolabel and VGP greases.

Using the lithium hydroxide dispersion route, base greases were manufactured using the base oils listed in table 14. The thickener was either simple lithium or lithium complex utilizing a 3:1 12-hydroxystearic acid to sebacic acid ratio. The greases were made slightly stiff so that they could be cut back to an NLGI grade 2 using the corresponding base fluid. The properties of the base greases are included in table 15.

- 31 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

Summary and Conclusions

This paper has shown that there are now several technologies available to help the grease producer manufacture cost effective lithium soap greases and high quality lithium complex greases. The key technologies outlined are: yield improvers for simple lithium greases; bleed improvers for both simple and lithium complex greases in a variety of different base oils; and enhancers which can be used to improve the thermal stability and dropping points of simple lithium greases This paper also demonstrates that lithium complex lubricating greases that utilize biobased synthetic esters as base oils can be readily produced. The technology has resulted in the development of environmentally considerate higher performance lubricating greases.

Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge many co-workers and departments within The Lubrizol Corporation for their contributions to this work.

to Make Simple and Complex Lithium Greases”, NLGI Spokesman (2007) Volume 71 pp17-24 (9)

Lorimor, J.J., “Improving the Heat Resistance of Simple Lithium Soaps Using Borated Additives”, 77th NLGI Annual Meeting, Bonita Springs, FL, 14th June 2010

(10)

Grease Production Survey Report 2012, NLGI, Kansas City, Missouri 64112 (www.NLGI.org)

(11)

Ward, Jr., W. C., and Fish, G., “Development of Greases with Extended Grease and Bearing Life Using Pressure Differential Scanning Calorimetry and Wheel Bearing Life Testing.”

NLGI Spokesman (2010) Volume 74(5) pages1427

(12)

Ward, Jr., W. C., and Qureshi, F.S. “Influence of components blended to a target base oil viscosity on liquid phase and lithium grease properties” NLGI Spokesman (2009) Volume 74 (1) pages 21-31

(13)

Waynick, J.A. “Polyurea Grease with Reduced Oil Separation”, US Patent 4,759,859, Jul. 26, 1988, USPTO

(14)

Bessette, P.A., “Manufacturing Grease Using Dry Technology”, NLGI Spokesman (2002) Volume 65 (11) pages 14-17

(15)

Honary, L; “Market Opportunities in Biobased Lubricating Greases”, 76th NLGI Annual Meeting Address 2009, Loews Ventana Canyon, Tucson, AZ, June 15th 2009

(16)

Honary, L; “An Update on the Use of Microwaves in Manufacturing Grease” paper #1302 80th NLGI Annual Meeting Loews Ventana Canyon, Tucson, AZ, June 16th 2013

(17)

Fish, G., Robinson. P, and McSkimming, N. “Understanding Component Requirements for Formulating High Performance Environmentally Acceptable Greases” ASTM symposium on Environmentally Considerate Lubricants, December 9, 2013, Tampa, FL

References (1)

NLGI Grease Guide, 5th Edition, NLGI 2006

(2)

ELGI Reach consortium presentation, 18th ELGI Annual Meeting 2006, Prague, Czech Republic

(3)

(4)

Klemgard, E.N., “Lubricating Greases”, (1927) The Chemical Catalog Company, Inc. Graham, D.S., Masters, K. and Scott, “Grease Manufacturing Methods”, NLGI Spokesman (1992) Volume 56 page 363

(5)

Krol, R., “Planning, Design and Construction of Specialty Lubricants Plant”, NLGI Spokesman (1993) Volume 57, page 490

(6)

Polishuk, A. T., “Lubricating Greases from Preformed Soaps” NLGI Spokesman (2001) Volume 65 (1) pages 12-15

(7)

Morgan, D., Kay, J.S. and Coe, C., “Critical Variables in Lithium Complex Grease Manufacturing” 80th NLGI Annual General Meeting paper #1313, Tucson, Arizona, 2013

(8)

Nolan, S.J. and Zeitz, J.B. “Anhydrous Lithium Hydroxide Dispersion: A New and Efficient Way

Advertiser’s Index Afton Chemical, pg 15 Covenant Engineering, pg 47 Lubes N Greases, pg 6 Lubrizol Corporation, Back Cover Patterson Industries Canada, A Division of All-Weld, Co. Ltd, pg 33 Petro-Lubricant Testing Laboratories, Inc., pg 5 Vanderbilt Chemicals, LLC, Inside Front Cover

PATTERSON INDUSTRIES

CANADA

"The Process Equipment People"

A D i v i s i o n o f A L L - W E L D C O M P A N Y L I M I T E D • Engineers Since 1920 49 PASSMORE AVE • SCARBOROUGH (TORONTO), ONTARIO M1V 4T1 • TEL: (416) 694-3381 • FAX: (416) 691 2768 E-MAIL: process@pattersonindustries.com WEB: www.pattersonindustries.com

• Designers & Manufacturers of

Grease Kettles • Autoclave and Atmospheric types (pressurized and non-pressurized) • Capacities from 1 gallon to 6000 gallon GlobAl leAder in quAlity And teChniCAl innovAtion Your source for Pressure Vessels, Heat Exchangers, Process Equipment, Autoclaves, Filter Housings from stainless steel, carbon steel, nickel alloys, non-ferrous alloys to ASME Codes, European PED, Canadian CSA B51, ISO 9001 certified.

www.pattersonindustries.com — 1-888-368-8884

Applying Automation to Batch Manufacturing Using Industry Standards

By Bruce Jensen & Marcus Tennant Yokogawa Corporation of America Sugarland, TX

Abstract

Batch processes in many industries, including grease manufacturing, are built to achieve very flexible manufacturing requirements. Often, when automating a batch process, that flexibility is lost making it difficult for operators to introduce new products and make process modiἀcations. Developed and reἀned over the past 20 years, the ISA Batch Standard (ISA 88) has become a commonly understood approach to communicate batch system requirements across R&D, process engineering and control disciplines, and has enabled manufactures to build flexible and highly automated batch systems.

This presentation will outline the basics of the ISA-88 standard and provide an overview of how it has helped many different companies achieve agile and flexible manufacturing in highly automated batch systems.

Overview of Batch Processing

In the universe of manufacturing, there are two broad ways to produce items for mass markets. On one end of the spectrum, a discrete manufacturer produces things: cars, electronics, appliances and tools. This is where assembly lines with robots and high speed packaging are very prevalent. At the other end, process manufactures make material: gasoline, diesel fuel, paper, and bulk chemicals. Both of these manufacturing worlds share many common traits. They both strive for high levels of automation to help them meet market demands by producing efficiently and at a high rate of speed.

Some products for more specialized markets do not have to be produced in quantities that justify major manufacturing efforts. There are many opportunities

for more complex and customized production. For products where the marketplace demands more limited qualities such as pharmaceuticals, food, and many specialty chemicals, including greases and lubricants, manufacturers walk a ἀne line between producing products that are considered commodities on one hand, while still being very specialized to meet customers’ exacting standards.

Issues with Automation in Batch Production Processes

For batch processing, the biggest advantage is often the capability to customize each batch to meet a customer’s requirements. With the advent of computer-based control system technology, the continuous process world quickly adopted the DCS (distributed control system) to automate control functions, replacing pneumatic and single loop analog control. On the discrete manufacturing side, the PLC (programmable logic controller) was developed to replace complicated relaybased machine controls used in many industries.

For batch manufacturers, the introduction of computerbased automation and control technology put them in a quandary. There were certainly recognizable beneἀts to automating a batch process: improved quality, consistency and lower manufacturing costs, but there were downsides as well. In batch manufacturing, procedural control is a major requirement and programming often became very complex to allow users the ability to switch product manufacturing procedures.

Typically the systems were coded by very talented control engineers who understood the embedded procedural

- 34 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

control and had to make changes requested by the plant chemist or process engineer.

Often the programing was very complex and if the control engineer who designed it originally switched jobs or got promoted, it became difficult to make changes to the batch system.

A Brief History of the ISA-88 Standard.

This kind of frustration was duplicated in many industries such as food and beverage, pharmaceutical and specialty chemical manufacturing. In response, in 1988, the International Society of Automation (ISA) formed standard and practices committee SP88 to provide guidelines for the design and speciἀcations of batch control systems, drawing from existing standards and recommended practices in the industry with the objectives of: 1. Deἀne terminology speciἀc to batch control systems that will encourage understanding between users, equipment vendors and system integrators.

2. Provide a standard structure for data in a batch control language to simplify programming, conἀguration tasks and communication between various components of the system.

3. Provide a standard data structure for batch systems that will simplify data communications within the system architecture.

4. Determine a standard batch control architecture.

After many years of intense work by the committee, the ISA-88 standard was approved in 1995 and was approved by the IEC (International Electrotechnical commission) in 1997 as IEC 61512-1. The standard was reviewed and updated in 2010.

Advantages of the Standard

Since the approval and publication of the standard in 1995, many companies in many different industries saw many beneἀts in ISA 88, including: • A common terminology and set of models for owner operators to discuss system requirements with automation vendors and system integrators.

• A conceptual basis for separating the recipe that instructs how the batch is to be made from the equipment that is used to make the batch. This separation enables process specialists, chemists, and formulation scientists to make changes in their recipe procedures without having to make changes to equipment control code.

• A modular structural approach that promotes reusable code and procedures.

• Scalable models and concepts that are expandable if additional levels are needed and collapsible if all the levels described are not needed.

• A structure that can apply to automated and manually-controlled batches.

• A methodology that applies to simple batch processes as easily as it does to complex batch processes.

Key Concepts of ISA-88

To introduce the working concepts of ISA-88 we need to examine the primary models and deἀnitions that are the most important components of the standard.

Physical model (for equipment) The physical model describes the hierarchy of equipment used in batching operations.

- 35 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

The model describes seven levels shown in Figure 1.

The ἀrst three levels (enterprise, site and area) primarily provide a connection into the business systems of a company and are not used in detail when implementing a batch automation process.

The enterprise is the company that owns the plant.

It may include multiple production sites. The site is typically the plant where the manufacturing takes place. It may be identiἀed by physical, geographical or a logical segmentation.

An area deἀnes a speciἀc location within a site such as a building or other physical layout.

The process cell is the highest level of ISA-88 where batch control boundaries are deἀned when implementing the standard. The process cell contains all of the equipment required to manufacture a batch. A process cell may contain more than one pathway or process train to complete a batch.

A unit is where batch processing occurs, and is typically a vessel such as a reactor or mixing tank that performs some sort of value-added activity such as blending or reaction that adds value to the product being processed.

A unit can only contain one batch at a time.

An equipment module is a group of items that works together to perform a processing activity. Some equipment modules might be ἀxed in place and therefore associated with only on unit. Other items may be more portable and shared among multiple units. Something like a CIP (clean in place) system might be allocated temporarily from one unit to another during processing.

Control modules form the lowest level of the model which includes basic sensors, actuators and other process equipment that can operate as a single entity and typically interfaces with the plant’s control system.

Procedural model (for recipes)

The procedural model (ἀgure 2) deἀnes the equipment actions that occur in a sequence. Like the physical model it is hierarchical in nature and also contains equipment requirements and formulation information.

A procedure is an ordered set of unit procedures and encompasses the overall strategy for manufacturing a batch. It orchestrates the complete control of all the equipment in the process cell.

The next level is the unit procedure, which is an ordered sequence of operations carried out in a single unit. Only one unit procedure can be active in one unit at a time, although two or more unit procedures can be active as long as they are in separate units.

An operation is an ordered sequence of phases carried out in a single unit. Operations typically involve taking the batch being processed from one type of physical change to another, such as a reaction, mixing or heating.

The phase is the ἀnal element of the procedural model and performs actions on the process. They are the elements of the procedural model that actually perform processing actions on the batch. The higher

- 36 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

level procedure, unit procedure, and operations are used primarily to group, organize and direct phases

Linking procedures to physical equipment

At some point, a procedure to manufacture a batch must connect the procedural model and physical model to achieve process functionality. The capabilities of the physical model equipment are used to accomplish the desired processing tasks of the procedural control model.

Figure 3 from ISA88 shows an example of the mapping between the procedural control model, physical model, and process model. Note that a one-to-one relationship is not required. In the example shown, unit procedures, operations and phases of the procedural control model can be supported by the units of the physical model.

States and commands

ISA-88 emphasizes the importance of process states and commands. The state speciἀes the current condition of a procedural element. A command is one method for moving the procedural element from one state to another. The standard gives an example of a state

diagram, but it is not necessary to follow the example. In the example shown in ἀgure 4, the procedural element in a routine execution would start in an idle state.

When issued a run command, the procedural element transitions to a running state performing its normal processing task. Once the procedural element completes its processing task, it transitions from a running state to a complete state and waits for a reset command to cause a transition to an idle state. The commands pause, hold, stop and abort and the corresponding process states paused, held, stopped and aborted represent different levels of exception handling of the procedural element to get it in a condition that is appropriate for efficient and safe operation of the plant.

Example in grease manufacturing

Figure 5 gives an example of how processing equipment may be categorized utilizing the ISA-88 Physical model. In this simple example the Process Cell contains only one Unit, the dispersion vessel.

The equipment associated with the dispersion vessel contains two equipment modules material charging and recirculation. There are four control modules deἀned two

- 37 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

of them are organized under the equipment modules pump and material selection.

The other two Dispersion and Temperature control are directly associated with the unit- the dispersion vessel.

Figure 6 shows how the procedural model may be applied to a basic grease manufacturing procedure.

The overall procedure Make Grease A contains the unit procedure component Make Suspension. The unit procedure contains the operation AIP suspension with one of the phases add oil. Typically it is the phases that would be associated with the control modules in the physical model.

Applying the principles of ISA 88 to other plant applications Packaging and other discrete manufacturing

ISA-S88 Part 5 (Make2Pack) embraces some of the basic concepts developed for the batch manufacturing industries with the intent of providing the same beneἀts to the machine control industry, speciἀcally packaging machines.

An implementation example of ISA-88 became the basis of the packaging standard known as PackML. The OMAC PackML Implementation Guide can be found at the OMAC website. http://www.omac.org/content/ packml

Continuous process applications

Since ISA 88 was adopted, many engineers have informally applied the concepts of ISA 88 to continuous processing control applications such as physical - 38 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

model, modularization and state operation model. In any continuous process operation there are many procedures that are executed to assure the safe and efficient running of the process such as startup, shutdown, and product grade transition. In 2010 the standards committee was formed (ISA-106) to focus on the procedural operations in continuous process applications. In August of 2013 the committee issued their ἀrst technical report, “Procedure Automation for Continuous Process Operations – Models and Terminology” which is available from the ISA http://www.isa.org/Template.cfm?Section=Standar ds2&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay. cfm&ContentID=94066

Recommended reading

ISA in different applications and industries.

4. Applying S88: Batch Control from a User’s Perspective by Jim Parshall and Larry Lamb.

Published by the ISA(International Society for Automation) 1999.

5. http://www.isa.org/Template. cfm?Section=Books3&Template=/Ecommerce/ ProductDisplay.cfm&ProductID=2967 6. This book is a case history on applying ISA-88 at Ben & Jerry’s St. Albans ice cream plant. The book is informative and entertaining for covering a technical subject.

Bibliography •

1. The WBF Book Series: Volume 1 ISA-88 Implementation Experiences. Momentum Press 2010 Edited by William Hawkins, Dennis Brandl, and Walt Boyes.

2. http://www.momentumpress.net/books/wbf-seriesisa-88-implementation-experiences 3. This volume is a collection of papers that were presented at the World Batch Forum (Now part of MESA http://www.mesa.org/en/index.asp about several companies experiences in implementing

•

ANSI/ISA-88.00.01-2010 Batch Control Part 1: Models and Terminology. Research Triangle Park, NC ISA, 2010 Ishchuck, Yu. L. Lubricating Grease Manufacturing Technology. New Delhi, India, New Age International Publishers 2005

- 39 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

INNOVATIVE ENGINEERING DESIGN FACILITATES PLANT CONSTRUCTION

By Richard Burkhalter Covenant Engineering Services, LLC. Branson, Missouri, USA

Abstract

Traditional engineering design for any new facility, including manufacturing and processing facilities, has involved the development of drawings which detail all elements of construction.

In addition to the drawings, basic material speciἀcations and construction criteria are detailed on the drawings and provided in supplemental written form. A complete construction package can

contain tens of drawings, or more, depending on the size of the facility, and multiple binders containing very detailed speciἀcations.

This paper explores the use of a computer generated 3D model for the construction of smaller facilities, such as lubricating grease manufacturing facilities. The 3D model not only provides an image of the ἀnished plant that can be manipulated by a free software viewer to see the details of the future

- 40 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

facility from any angle, but also through the viewer provides the ability to obtain dimensions on the screen, thus eliminating the majority of the detailed mechanical drawings.

When compared to the traditional engineering design approach, the use of a 3D computer generated model of the proposed plant can help reduce capital cost and shorten start-up time.

Introduction

When applying general engineering design, the approach is greatly affected by the type of design required. Grass roots facilities are generally require the most engineering design, but don’t necessarily have the highest cost to capital ratio. Plant modiἀcations will generally require less extensive engineering design, but most often has a higher cost to capital ratio. Trouble shooting, a third category for engineering design is highly variable in cost to capital ratio. At times, troubleshooting issues require very little engineering design effort even though the investigative effort may be substantial. In this paper, we will focus more on the grass roots category, grass roots being deἀned as a new facility from the ground up which includes “green ἀeld” facilities as well as additions to an existing facility.

When developing the engineering approach for a grass roots facility, there are three basic steps recommended.

These include a feasibility study or conceptual design, basic or process design, and detailed design. These steps are building blocks for the project and have check points throughout to provide careful review and economic analysis before the major capital expenditure is executed.

Traditional Engineering Design

Conceptual Design. A conceptual design will often be interchangeable with a feasibility study. Both attempt to deἀne project objectives, develop basic design parameters, and provide the opportunity for economic evaluation. Economic evaluation is usually conducted by the client company, but uses information from the conceptual design in that evaluation. This step is considered to be critical to the success of the project.

By developing and documenting the project objectives and basic design parameters, the chances of scope creep, or, unchecked expansion of the project scope, are signiἀcantly reduced. Depending on the size of the project, a conceptual design can cost between $15,000 (USD) and $30,000 (USD). This is money well spent considering expenditure for the new facility may range from $10 million (USD) to $30 million (USD). Too many times, when this step is not fully implemented, cost overruns can be 30% to 50% of the original capital cost estimate.

Basic Design. Basic design is sometimes used interchangeably with process design. The objective of this engineering stage is to deἀne the details of the process. By deἀning the details of the process, we include development of the product flow, sizing major equipment, establishing required ἀeld instrumentation, and deἀning the control philosophy. The basic design is critical for several reasons. First, it establishes another check point in the project for evaluation of the project objectives and for revisiting the economic analysis. Second, the basic design provides the basis for the detailed design, including general equipment arrangement, equipment speciἀcations, and relating the process design paramenters. Again, depending on the size of the project, the basic design can cost 5% to 10% of the total installed cost of the new facility.

Detailed Design. Detailed design is the ἀnal design stage, but is not necessarily the ἀnal stage for engineering support. The detailed design provides all of the detailed dimensions for fabrication and installation of the new facility for all disciplines. Detailed drawings are generated for civil, structural, mechanical, and electrical, including controls, construction. Needless to say, this is normally the most intensive stage of engineering. The following highlight some of the activities associated with the detailed design of a new facility.

• Site Layout. The site layout includes the civil/ structural design of the general facility, including buildings, road and rail access points, site drainage, and exterior mechanical needs such as pipe supports.

• Utility Supply. The utility supply includes water, electrical power, and sewer services. It should be noted that the engineering completed during the basic design is essential for assuring adequate utilities are provided for the new facility.

• Equipment Layout. An initial plant layout is completed during the basic design phase. However, during detailed design, the equipment layout is developed with greater detail in plans and elevations. At this point, free standing structural supports for the equipment are developed, utilizing the interface between process design and mechanical design. If equipment supports are

- 41 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

- 42 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

integral to the building, the structural design must occur during the design of the building based on the equipment layout developed during the basic design.

• Detailed Pipe Routing. Once the equipment is set, the pipe routing can be done. Often, during this process, adjustments need to be made in the plans and elevations to accommodate the process piping. Plans, elevations, and details are developed to assure adequate access is provided for both operations and maintenance. Needless to say, this activity can be very time consuming to assure constructability and operability, and requires careful review by the process engineers. Figures 1 & 2, show a typical double line piping detail.

Consider each pump will need at least one elevation detail drawing and a plan drawing as shown on page 42.

• Oversights in the development of the details contribute a great deal to the necessity for ἀeld modiἀcations.

• Electrical Routing. Electrical routing usually follows pipe routing design so that clear paths are maintained for both the piping and electrical runs.

When considering the above activities, it is not difficult to understand why the drawing package for the new facility can consist of a hundred or more drawings for a

medium sized plant. At $500 to $1500 per drawing, the cost for the detailed design can easily exceed a half million dollars when adding the engineering and overhead costs, and the design ἀrm’s proἀt. Add in bid package preparation and acquisition of equipment quotes and evaluations, it is not hard to understand how detailed engineering can amount to 10% to 15% of the total installed cost of a new grease plant.

Modified Engineering Design

When designing a new facility, certain engineering activities are generally considered essential to achieve the most cost efficient construction and trouble-free start up. One of these activities is the conceptual design.

It cannot be emphasized enough how important this engineering step is to the overall success of the project.

Establishing a solid basis of design and accommodation for future growth is vital to not only the initial construction efficiency, but also for future additions and modiἀcations. It is far too common for clients to “paint themselves into a corner” by not giving adequate consideration to future needs. Once the conceptual design is complete, consideration can be given to a modiἀed approach to the subsequent design stages.

Basic Design. Basic design activities can be increased by moving some of the detailed design activities into this step. For example, general pipe routings and electrical

- 43 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

routings can be more completely deἀned. Some details such as mechanical plans and elevations, and control wiring diagrams can also be done in this stage. These are done to set up the modiἀed detailed design step.

Detailed Design. This is the stage that can, if executed properly, provide a signiἀcant cost savings. The modiἀed approach for the detailed design is the use of a 3D CAD generated model of the plant. However, there are a number of factors that need to be understood for this to be a successful and cost saving approach.

• Vendor Drawings. Good vendor drawings are necessary for developing the various equipment CAD blocks used in the model. For the most part, vendors supply very basic dimensional drawings that are difficult to translate into a 3D image.

The better the drawings supplied, the less time consuming and the more realistic the 3D image.

If the vendors can supply CAD drawings of the equipment, the process of developing the 3D image is greatly facilitated.

• Structural Drawings. The 3D model is built on the structural drawings provided. They are essentially the skeleton of the model. Incidentally, the ἀrst opportunity for identifying and correcting steel interferences occurs when ἀtting in the equipment blocks (3D images) in to the model. Kettle nozzles can easily be blocked or partially blocked by supporting steel. Insufficient clearance for piping and insulation is a problem that is nearly impossible to correct during construction. By identifying the interferences at this stage, either the steel can be modiἀed or the nozzles shifted on the kettle to provide the clearance needed.

• Capable Installation Contractor. Having an installation contractor that is experienced with using a computer generated 3D model is absolutely critical to the success of this alternate approach. The contractor must deal with several challenges, including interpreting the model and communicating the details to his subcontractors, to take advantage of the opportunities the model affords the contractor.

• In years past, physical models were built by an engineering ἀrm and kept at the construction site during the entire construction period. Each of the contractor disciplines could observe the model

•

•

and develop a good sense of what their part of the installation would look like. The 3D computer generated model takes the place of the physical model once used to facilitate construction. The advantage the computer model offers is that it provides the ability to ‘move’ within the model, look in any direction, and zoom in on a detail; something that was impossible with the physical model.

The 3D model, like its predecessor, allows the contractor to ‘see’ what is being built. Many, if not most, contractors can nearly build a facility by looking at a good picture of the unit. We have encountered many very ‘visual’ contractors and heard them express their ability to do a much better job by having a ‘picture’ to look at. If, on the other hand, the general contractor and sub-contractors are not visual, much of the advantage will be lost.

The contractor and the designers must be able to work together. There will always be questions and interpretations that will need to be clariἀed.

Providing the means and encouraging good communications between the two groups is an essential function of the owner. However, both entities must be willing to work together.

Advantages: There are a number of advantages associated with using a 3D computer generated model for constructing the new facility.

Construction advantage. In addition to enabling the contractors to see the plant in general, it allows them to see the equipment locations and understand how everything ἀts together. Perhaps more importantly, the various contractors can see where they are to install their equipment, pipe and electrical routing, and areas to avoid. The electrical contractor can readily locate cable trays and other electrical runs and avoid conflicts with piping.

The ἀre protection contractor can locate the runs for their piping, giving precedence to the process piping. In short, by having a visual representation of the facility, contractors can avoid interferences and rework.

Operations advantage. By having a visual representation of the facility, the owner can feel conἀdent the plant will look and function like

- 44 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

intended. Since the model is built before any construction begins, any changes deemed necessary can be made well in advance of construction, simply changing lines on paper. Perhaps one advantage not often thought of is the ability to have the plant reviewed by operators and maintenance personnel.

Critical input from these two groups can save construction cost and improve the efficiency of the operation. Furthermore, new operators can be partially trained prior to start-up. Pipe and valves can be identiἀed and the operations procedures checked before the plant is built.

Marketing advantage. The 3D model can be an effective marketing tool. It can serve as a preview for the suppliers, sales people, distributors and selected customers.

Engineering advantage. The 3D model can eliminate nearly all of the detailed drawings. Of course this depends on the contractor’s ability to build from a visual model. Only a few critical drawings are provided with dimensions for signiἀcant portions of the facility. In addition, through the use of a free (downloaded) viewer, dimensions can be obtained from the model, particularly true when using Solid Works™ to generate the model. Needless to say, using the viewing tool requires a certain amount of computer literacy on the behalf of the contractor. Instead of generating tens of drawings, the engineering design ἀrm would need to provide only a few drawings to cover the critical areas.

Rework advantage. Rework or ἀeld modiἀcations are the nemesis of all construction projects.

According to the Construction Industry Institute (CII), direct costs to a project caused by rework averaged 5% of the total construction costs in 2005.1 The largest contributors to the rework costs were reported to be design change, design errors or omissions, and constructor’s errors or omissions.2 Each of these are controllable, but always seem to ἀnd their way into a project. When working with a 3D model, design changes can be minimized by having the owner, along with the operations and maintenance representatives, review the model BEFORE construction begins.

Walking through the process step-by-step, and following the model, late changes in the design can be nearly eliminated. Review by the construction manager and contractor representatives can greatly reduce any misunderstandings in the design and catch any constructability problems BEFORE construction begins. By performing these reviews, it is reasonable to assume 1% to 2% of the direct costs and a similar amount of indirect costs (loss of schedule and productivity) can be saved. Recent projects that used the 3D model for construction did not report any signiἀcant rework costs and, to the contrary, cost was avoided on one project when the riggers reviewed the model and were able to pre-plan the kettle installation more effectively.

Disadvantages: There are number of disadvantages associated with using a 3D computer generated model for constructing the new facility.

Computer/Technical capability. Since the model is computer generated and a computer must be used to view the model, the owner and contractors must possess a reasonable degree of computer skills. In some cases, this requirement could eliminate an otherwise capable constructor thereby reducing the effectiveness of the bidding process.

Some constructors are not comfortable with using a computer to determine the construction requirements and communicate those requirements to their crews. Furthermore, the constructors must have the ability to ἀeld design some of the details when using the model as the primary construction document. This is particularly true for the electrical and ἀre protection contractors since these systems are not usually shown on the model. General electrical drawings are usually provided, but detailed routing and installation drawings are not.

And, since ἀre protection contractors must design their system to provide adequate ἀre suppression should a ἀre occur, sprinkler systems are rarely, if ever, designed by an engineering design ἀrm.

New work only. The 3D model approach is not well suited for modiἀcations to existing facilities.

Few plants have retained sufficient nor current drawings to allow a truly representative model to

- 45 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

be built from those drawings. Although technology exists that can produce the information required to build a 3D model of portions of an existing facility, the cost of doing so is usually prohibitive.

Companies possessing the skills and the equipment to generate a 3D image of an existing facility are not common and may not be readily available in all areas. Therefore, the 3D model approach is only well suited for new facilities or new additions to an existing facility.

Few residual drawings. As would be expected, few drawings would be produced for the new facility. The lack of reference drawings could be a disadvantage for future modiἀcations to that facility.

Potentially more ἀeld work would be required to develop the design for the proposed facility modiἀcations. However, since the trend has been to avoid updating record drawings, this may not be as large a factor as it might have been in the past.

The electronic model can be archived and used for reference, but, like the drawings of the past, will become out of date within a few years.

Block library needed. Most of the main processing equipment for a grease plant is somewhat unique to the industry. Few suppliers have AutoCAD ἀles that they are willing to share with an engineering ἀrm, much less having a 3D CAD ἀle for that equipment. An engineering ἀrm may need to expend a signiἀcant amount of time acquiring the drawings and developing the various 3D equipment blocks needed for the model. In addition, developing a 3D block for used equipment can be very challenging. Depending on the age and the current status of the manufacturer, drawings may not be available for developing the block. Such is the case when used grease kettles are used in the new facility. When drawings are not available, drawings may be available from a supplier for a similar piece of equipment from which a block can be generated. It must be recognized by the owner and constructor that using a substitute equipment drawing, additional ἀeld time will be required to “ἀeld ἀt” the used equipment.

Economics: There are some real credits that can be garnered through the use of a 3D computer generated model. Some are reasonable speculations, but others are based on experience.

The number of piping/mechanical drawings reduced. In one case, a new, small, grease plant with one contactor and three kettles managed on twenty eight (28) piping/mechanical drawings. At today’s rate of about $500 to $1,500 (USD) per drawing, depending on the level of detail, the approximate cost for those drawings, would be $30,000 (USD).

The number of drawings required for a medium sized grease plant would be about two and a half (2.5) times as many, resulting in a cost of nearly $80,000 just for the drawings. In comparison, a 3D computer generated model for a medium size plant in the Midwest, USA, cost approximately $30,000 and only six (6) mechanical drawings were provided thereby providing the mechanical package for approximately $36,000, resulting in an engineering cost savings of about $44,000.

Rework/ἀeld modiἀcations reduced. Rework costs are difficult to quantify for many projects because these costs are not often rigorously tracked. When they are tracked, only the direct costs are accounted for and the indirect costs overlooked. For example, indirect costs would include loss of schedule and productivity; though real they are sometimes hard to quantify. As mentioned above, rework costs average about 5% of construction costs. For the medium size grease plant, rework costs could easily amount to $160,000. If only 1% of the 5% attributed to rework costs were avoided, a savings of $16,000 could be claimed.

Adding these two examples together, the cost savings to the project would be about $60,000, a return of 200% on the cost of the 3D model. Other savings may also be garnered, such as reduced training time after the plant is built for both the operations and maintenance staff.

- 46 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4

Summary:

Utilization of the 3D computer generated model can reduce the engineering costs for a new, medium sized grease plant by approximately 10%, and reduce construction costs by approximately 1% to 2%. The 3D model provides the means for the owner to review the designed facility and gain feedback from operators and maintenance personnel. It can also be used as a pre-startup training tool for new operators. And, it can serve as a marketing tool, demonstrating the enhanced production facility that will provide quality products to customers. With these beneἀts, it is prudent to consider the use of this innovative design tool when constructing a new plant or a new addition to an existing plant.

References:

[1] Construction Industry Institute (CII). (2005). “Making Zero Rework a Reality.” RS 203-1 (Nov), The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex. [2] Hwang, B., Thomas, S., Haas, C., and Caldas, C. (2009).

“Measuring the Impact of Rework on Construction Cost Performance.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. ASCE March 2009.

Covenant Engineering Services, Inc. Quality Engineering Services Backed with Integrity Specialists: Grease Manufacturing and Lube Oil Blending

Conceptual, Process, and Detail Design 140 P.O. Corporate Place Box 761 Branson, MO Chesterton, IN 65616 46304 417-336-9810 Phone: 219-728-1054 Phone: 219-929-5781

www.covenantengr.com

- 47 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015

Helping the World Run a Little More Efficiently In today’s complex marketplace, you need a technology partner that understands the demands of ever-changing applications, environmental concerns, LEAN manufacturing and worldwide standards and protocols.

Lubrizol is at the forefront of industry advancements offering our customers superior functionality, product consistency, R&D and testing. We are improving grease performance and processes worldwide.

To learn more visit www.lubrizol.com.

© 2014 The Lubrizol Corporation.

All rights reserved. 14-0132