Two words, big difference

by Drew D. Troyer

The words lubricant and lubricate are obviously different but related. Anyone with memories of grammar school can see that lubricant is a noun and lubricate is a verb. Strangely, many plant people wrongly conclude that once the lubricant is properly selected, effective lubrication is achieved, by definition. Quite to the contrary.

Selecting the lubricant is a comparatively easy part of the lubrication equation. Sure, there are challenging instances that require some thought and expertise, but these are few and far between.

I have outlined a non-exhaustive list of a half-dozen factors on the lubricate side of the equation that, if neglected, will hamstring your efforts to achieve and maintain mechanical reliability.

1) Lubricant storage and handling: To lubricate effectively, you must store and deliver the lubricant in a manner that assures that the right lubricant gets to the right machine in the right condition (sometimes called the three rights of lubrication). As obvious as that sounds, it requires a great deal of tenacity to achieve. Machines, lubricant drums/containers, transfer devices, hoses and funnels all must be kept clean and orderly. They also must be clearly marked to avoid becoming contaminated with dirt or another incompatible product during handling.

2) Lube application method/device: The right lubricant applied incorrectly leads to poor overall lubrication. For instance, suppose a splash-lubricated (method/device) gearbox, specified to use an EP 220 (lubricant), is designed to be operated in a horizontal position but actually operates at a 45-degree angle. Changing the lubricant typically won’t alter the fact that the bearing(s) and possibly the gears themselves on the elevated side of the gearbox run without sufficient lubrication. It’s necessary to modify the method of application to achieve effective lubrication of the gearbox in this example.  

3) Contamination control: The poor lubricant is at a disadvantage in its attempt to separate component surfaces when it becomes contaminated with particles, water, air, coolant, etc. The lubricant film that separates machine surfaces rarely exceeds the diameter of a red blood cell (about five microns, or 0.2 mils). In many cases, the surfaces are in contact (boundary lubrication). Dirt contamination wedges itself between moving surfaces, causing abrasion or contact fatigue. Water reduces the lubricant’s film strength, causes rust and corrosion, leads to cavitation erosion, and lies at the root of hydrogen-related wear. Contamination also promotes oxidation, thermal degradation, hydrolysis and other lubricant failure mechanisms. Mechanical reliability without contamination control is hard to imagine.

4) Sampling and oil analysis: Oil analysis is the scorecard for a good lubrication program. It lets you know if your proactive efforts to manage lubricant health and contamination are effective. It also alerts you when lubricants have become degraded and when machine are malfunctioning, and enables root cause analysis of these events so you can correct them effectively and efficiently.

5) Metrics and performance monitoring: Any controlled activity requires a feedback mechanism. Lubrication is no different. Oil analysis provides feedback about the lubricant, the machine and the manner in which the machine interfaces with the environment, but managers need an overall metric. I like the Overall Lubrication Effectiveness (OLE) metric for managers. In one easy-to-trend, easy-to-interpret metric, it reflects the plant’s percent conformance to the lube task PM schedule, percent conformance to contamination control targets and percent conformance to lube health targets. OLE helps managers keep their eye on the ball yet keep an arm’s length from the details and become involved with the details only on an exception basis.

6) Skills management: Lubrication is performed by people. People are more important to lubrication effectiveness than any other factor described herein. It’s a pity that the investment in lubrication skills is typically mediocre. Lubricators are often paid less than an “A-level mechanic” — often quite a bit less, despite the fact that an effective lube tech has the mechanical skills of an A-level mechanic, plus further training and skills in lubricant chemistry, lubrication dynamics, oil analysis and machine condition monitoring, reliability engineering, RCM, root cause failure analysis, etc. The organization can either educate, train and reward high-grade lube techs and analysts to prevent mechanical failure through proactive management of lubrication maintenance, or continue to pay for the repair and downtime associated with the failures. It’s an easy choice.

I’m always amazed at questions I receive from maintenance and reliability managers related to the use of this product or that product. Yes, some lubricants are better suited for a particular application than others. And yes, selecting the right lubricant is important. In reality, though, above a basic threshold, the other factors associated with lubrication are much more important.

We’ve only scratched the surface here, but I encourage you to look closely at your lubrication program in its entirety for opportunities.

Drew Troyer is the senior editor of Machinery Lubrication Magazine. If you have a lubrication or oil analysis question, contact Coach Troyer at or e-mail . 

Back to top   
Back to MRO Coach archives