Pump Reliability Study

Pump Reliability Study:

Irving Paper

By: Michael Chaffey

Work Term 2

435 Bayside Dr.Saint John, NB

E2J 1B2December 19th, 2014

Gordon JinCo-operative EducationFaculty of Engineering and Applied ScienceMemorial University of NewfoundlandSt. John’s, NL A1B 3X5

Mr. Jin:

Throughout my work term, I was employed in the Reliability Department at Irving Paper, and was supervised by Mr. Reinier Hugenholtz, P. Eng. The department is responsible for all machine reliability in the mill on a day-to-day basis.

Irving Paper is continuously looking for ways to elevate their paper making process. An important way of accomplishing this goal is by improving the reliability of their equipment. One of the many components that make the mill operable are their pumps; keeping these pumps in service is fundamental in preventing downtime and reducing costs to the mill. The purpose of this report, entitled "Pump Reliability Study: Irving Paper," is to document and outline the steps that went into analyzing the reliability of the pumps at Irving Paper. This report is my second of four work reports required by the Division of Co-operative Education at the Memorial University of Newfoundland. This report was written entirely by me and has not received any previous academic credit at this or any other academic institution.

Please contact me with any questions you may have regarding this report.

Sincerely,

Michael Chaffey201102142

Pump Reliability Study: Irving Paper

Irving Paper Inc.Supervisor: Reinier Hugenholtz, P. Eng.

December 19th, 2014

Michael Chaffey201102142

Term 4 Mechanical EngineeringMemorial University of Newfoundland

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Previous to this project, Irving Paper’s reliability and maintenance personnel were

unclear on many aspects surrounding the pumps at their site. It was believed that a lot of

money was being spent on the maintenance of these pumps and that the mean time

between failures was not as long as it should have been. This report provides an analysis

and evaluation of the current state of pump reliability at Irving Paper along with the

associated maintenance costs.

Five pump tracking lists were created from data extracted from the mill’s computerized

maintenance management system. These lists were used to monitor the location and

details of the pumps across the mill. It was found that the mill has roughly 651 pumps

across the site. These pumps are located as follows:

Paper Machine #1 (170 Pumps) Paper Machine #2 (153 Pumps) Thermal Mechanical Pulping (223 Pumps) Other (105 Pumps)

An analysis of the pump spending in the mill concluded that, excluding labour, the mill

spends approximately $711,000 each year on pump rebuilds. The study also shows that

20% of the pumps account for roughly 90% of the pump rebuild costs over the last

5-¾ years. This indicates that the mill has some pumps that fail frequently. If these

pumps are dealt with, pump reliability could improve significantly, saving the mill money

on pump maintenance and by reducing downtime.

It is recommended that the mill allocates the time and resources to improve on some of

their existing processes:

Work Order Detail Enterprise One Swim Lanes Track Rebuilds

Root Cause Failure Analysis Track Rework Develop Improvement Process

Pump Reliability Study: Irving Paper Last Modified: December 18th, 2014 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Executive Summary..............................................................................................................i

Table of Contents................................................................................................................ii

List of Figures....................................................................................................................iii

List of Tables......................................................................................................................iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................1

1.1 Background...........................................................................................................1

1.2 Scope of Project....................................................................................................2

2.0 DATA MINING..........................................................................................................3

2.1 Pump Tracking......................................................................................................3

2.2 Work Order Cost Reports.....................................................................................4

3.0 GRAPHING................................................................................................................5

3.1 Pareto Costs By Area............................................................................................5

3.2 Annual Pump Repair Costs...................................................................................5

3.3 Top Ten Spreadsheets...........................................................................................7

3.4 Failure Timeline Graphs.......................................................................................9

4.0 ANALYSIS................................................................................................................10

4.1 Spreadsheets & Graphs.......................................................................................10

4.2 MC 5 Sunds Defibrator Pump.............................................................................11

5.0 CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................16

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................17

6.1 MC 5 Pump.........................................................................................................17

6.2 Changes to Procedures........................................................................................18

References..............................................................................................................................

Appendix A: ..........................................................................Pareto Charts by Mill Section

Appendix B: .....................................................................................Top Ten Pump Details

Appendix C: ..........................................................................................Mill Entity Number

Pump Reliability Study: Irving Paper Last Modified: December 18th, 2014 ii

Pump Reliability Study: Irving Paper Last Modified: December 18th, 2014 iii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Maintenance Costs by YearFigure 2. Top Ten Pumps Mill WideFigure 3. Sample Failure Timeline GraphFigure 4. MC 5 Pump Failure Timeline GraphFigure 5. MC 5 Pump Seal Cross-SectionFigure 6. Seal Face CrackFigure 7. Seal Face GougeFigure 8. Existing Stuffing Box

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Annual Pump CostsTable 2. Top Ten Pumps Mill Wide

Pump Reliability Study: Irving Paper Last Modified: December 18th, 2014 iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Irving Paper Incorporated (IPI) is located on the East Side of Saint John in Southern New

Brunswick. The mill employs roughly 310 staff and hourly employees full time in

addition to numerous contractors employed on a daily basis. With two paper machines

and the recent upgrades of $226 million to Paper Machine #1 in 2006 (Mackenzie, 2014),

IPI remains a leading manufacturer of supercalendered SCB, SCA and SCA+ grade paper

in the world (JD Irving).

IPI produces roughly 420,000 tonnes of paper per year. This paper is used to print

magazines and flyers for many of the leading companies in the business: Time

Magazine, Entertainment Weekly, Sports Illustrated, People and Money Magazine.

Irving Paper uses many systems to maintain their paper making process. These systems

include but are not limited to: pumps, motors, tanks, agitators, rolls, hydraulics,

lubrication, electrical and various chemical processes. Each of these components play an

essential part in keeping production running and ensuring that the end product is of high

enough quality for their customers.

The mill is split up into different departments commonly referred to as ‘mill area’. These

areas consist of the Paper Machine #1 department (PM1), Paper Machine #2 department

(PM2), the pulping department; Thermo Mechanical Pulping (TMP), and the Thermal

Plant (TP) where the mill’s steam is made with the use of natural gas boilers.

Pump Reliability Study: Irving Paper Last Modified: December 18th, 2014 1

1.2 Scope of Project

The goal of this study was to determine ways in which IPI could reduce maintenance

costs and improve the overall reliability of their pump systems. First, information was

collected regarding both the number and location of all pumps in the mill. A review on

current pump-related spending was then conducted. By examining spending trends, the

most costly pumps were able to be identified and targeted for further investigation. This

information was used to make recommendations for improving the reliability of the mill’s

pumps. Summaries for each aspect of the project are seen below.

How many pumps does IPI have and where are they located:

Irving Paper staff had an idea of how many pumps they had in each area of the

mill but this number was only a vague estimation. It is a part of the scope of this

project to identify all pumps in the mill along with their locations.

How much is IPI spending on pump overhauls each year?

There was also uncertainty among the staff at IPI regarding the amount spent on

pump rebuilds. It was a common opinion from staff that an unnecessary amount

was being spent on these rebuilds. However, there were no reports made on

maintenance spending that were broken down into equipment classes or by mill

area. This project will gather such information on pump-related spending.

What are the predominant failure causes of the pumps?

At IPI, there are many different pump failures each year. Every time a pump

fails, it is sent out for a rebuild and there is rarely investigation into the cause of

the failure. A major part of this project was to examine these failures to

determine where improvements could be made. There is a small amount of data

on the CMMS (computerized maintenance management system) from which a

trend for common pump failures was created.


2.0 DATA MINING

2.1 Pump Tracking

Lists of pumps were generated using JD Edwards OneWorld, the mill’s CMMS. The

equipment codes used in the pump entities are: 211; hydraulic and lubrication pumps,

255; vacuum pumps and 246; all other pumps. See Appendix C for a breakdown of the

entity number format used at IPI. Searches for codes were made and exported to excel

spreadsheets. The 651 pumps were divided into five sections, each having their own

tracking list:

Paper Machine #1 (170 Pumps) Paper machine #2 (153 Pumps) TMP (223 Pumps) Chemical Prep & Environmental (61 Pumps) Treatment Plant and Other (45 Pumps)

After the five initial lists of all pumps in the mill were created, the list for Paper Machine

#2 was expanded to include additional columns of pump detail:

Entity Number Entity Description Manufacturer Model

Type Size Speed Serial Number

Seal Type

This data was discovered through field surveying, searches through the company’s online

equipment files, through the hard copy equipment files and through the CMMS work

orders. Although this information was only found for the PM2 section (very time

consuming), it is recommended that this data is gathered for the other areas of the mill.


2.2 Work Order Cost Reports

A meeting was held with David Angevine, Irving Paper’s site accountant, to obtain cost

records on pump rotating assembly overhauls. Work order cost reports were used to

gather this information, which show all spending and corresponding work orders based

on inputs of time period and mill department. These cost reports were generated for the

time period of Jan. 1st, 2009 to Sept. 27th, 2014. Cost reports were generated for each of

the following departments:

Paper Machine #1 (Department Code: 2021)

Paper Machine #2 (Department Code: 2022)

TMP 1 & 2 (Department Code: 2013)

TMP 3 (Department Code: 2016)

Environmental (Department Code: 2010)

Thermal Plant (Department Code: 2031)

Since these reports include all costs over the time period for all equipment in the

department, filtering was required to obtain only the data relevant to pump rebuilds. Any

work orders referring to the rotating assembly or a pump overhaul were kept and all other

work orders were removed from the list. This left only the necessary information related

to pump failures. Next, the “Labour,” “Hours” and “O/T Hours” columns were deleted,

leaving only the “Stores,” “Non-Stores” and “Service” columns. The remaining items

were sorted by pump entity and from here sub-totals were calculated. The sub-total

values for each pump were then sorted in descending order to give a list of the most

costly pumps in each section of the mill.


3.0 GRAPHING

3.1 Pareto Costs By Area

Pareto charts were created for each of the three main sections of the mill: PM1, PM2 and

TMP. Once these Pareto charts were created, it was evident that the majority of the

failures were in a small number of the mill’s pumps (see Appendix A for lists sorted by

repair totals and the corresponding Pareto charts). As a result, a deeper investigation

into the failures of the ten most costly pumps in each section was done.

3.2 Annual Pump Repair Costs

In addition, work order cost reports were used to calculate annual total pump repair costs

in each section of the mill (Table 1). This information was collected for the years 2009-

2014. This data can be used to determine what sections of the mill are incurring the

highest costs; these areas can then be targeted for improvements to reduce spending.

Mill Area# Of

Pumps

Annual Pump Repair Costs2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014 (YTD)

PM1 170 $105,714 $208,974 $165,153 $236,355 $118,837 $135,824

PM2 153 $341,218 $179,009 $205,992 $222,286 $319,237 $185,954

TMP 223 $139,160 $229,429 $241,575 $217,375 $181,218 $223,294

Chem. &Envir.

61 $41,485 $91,606 $56,914 $43,826 $49,101 $54,596

TP & Other

44 $18,570 $32,238 $32,740 $52,978 $21,989 $41,159

Total: 641$646,14

7$741,25

7$702,37

4$772,82

0$690,38

2$640,82

7

Table 1. Annual Pump Costs


Using the data in Table 1, a graph displaying the total pump maintenance costs of the mill

by year was created; this graph can be seen in Figure 1. From 2009 to 2013, Irving Paper

spent an average of roughly $711,000 on pump maintenance each year.

Figure 1. Maintenance Costs by Year

By updating the bar graph in Figure 1 on a regular basis, mill staff will be able to monitor

their annual pump maintenance costs. Once modifications to the system are made, this is

where they will see the big picture and the cost outcomes of their improvements over

time. A potential budget could be set up and a category for a maintenance scorecard

could be created from this.


3.3 Top Ten Spreadsheets

The ten most costly pumps in each section, as determined from the Work Order Cost

Reports, were looked up using the CMMS and any relevant data was taken from the work

orders and populated into spreadsheets entitled “Top Ten-Details” for each of the three

largest sections in the mill; PM1, PM2 and TMP. For the majority, the work order

descriptions were vague or non-existent; making reliability improvement much more

difficult than it should have been. These spreadsheets gave the reliability team failure

details on thirty of the mill’s “bad actor” pumps. From the thirty worst pumps, another

list was created that displayed the ten most costly pumps mill wide; this list can be seen

in Table 2 below (see Appendix B for details on these pumps).

Kobe Pumps

Vacuum PumpsHydraulic

Top Ten Pumps Mill Wide (1/1/09 to 9/27/14)

Order Entity #Entity

DescriptionManufacture

r# of

WOsRebuild Cost

1 PM224691 PM2 Kobe Pump #1 Kobe: Rotojet 9 $170,809

2 PM225504Vacuum Pump - Pickup Uhlebox

Nash 6 $139,723


4 PM125521Couch High

Vacuum PumpNash 3 $102,781

5 PM1246139Trim Slitter Unit #2

PumpJet-X 8 $98,418

6 PM224627PM2 Vacuum Sump

Pump #2Byron Jackson 7 $89,446

7 GW624614HRU Recirculation

PumpAhlstrom 13 $86,401

8 GW624691MC Pump 5 -

Bleached TMP Tower

Sunds Defibrator

9 $82,703

9 PM1246138Trim Slitter Unit #1

PumpJet-X 13 $79,518



Table 2. Top Ten Pumps Mill Wide

In Figure 2, the maintenance costs of the top ten pumps in the mill are shown as a Pareto

chart. The red series in front represents the costs incurred from 2013 up to September

27th of 2014 only. This indicates whether a pump has needed to be replaced or had

significant repairs completed recently and whether it continues to be a nuisance to the

mill.

Figure 2. Top Ten Pumps Mill Wide


Kobe Pumps Vacuum Pumps Hydraulic

By examining trends in spending over time, it can be determined whether repairs have

been successful in eliminating issues with a pump system. Being able to support your

efforts with statistical data can come in handy in any field of work.


3.4 Failure Timeline Graphs

It was discussed that another point of interest for these failures is when they happened.

For instance, if changes were completed on a pump in 2013 and the failures continued

steadily after this point, it would be assumed that the issues with this particular pump

were not resolved. Had the number of failures decreased after this time, the reliability

team would likely shift their focus elsewhere, concluding that the reliability of this pump

had been improved.

The failure costs taken from the CMMS were plotted against a constant x-axis that

represents the total time period studied. Each failure cost appears above the timeline at

the time of failure. Thirty of these graphs were created: one for each of the ten worst

pumps in the PM1, PM2 and TMP areas (see the Top Ten Mill Wide Pumps in Appendix

B and an example of one of these graphs in Figure 3 below).

Figure 3. Sample Failure Timeline Graph


4.0 ANALYSIS

4.1 Spreadsheets and Graphs

It is seen from the “Maintenance Costs By Year Graph” in Figure 1 that, over the 5 full

years studied, approximately $711,000 was spent on pump rebuilds in the mill annually.

From the Pareto charts (Appendix A), it can be seen that a large number of these costs

occurred in a small number of pumps.

There are about 653 pumps in service in the mill. The total number of pumps and the

total amount spent on these pumps is enough information to calculate how close pump

reliability at the mill is to the ‘80/20 Rule’ (or the Pareto Principle). The 80/20 Rule is an

accepted standard for reliability in many different applications. This principle states that

approximately 80% of the costs will be spent on maintaining 20% of the equipment (in

this case, pumps) (Reh, 2014).

Out of the 651 pumps at Irving Paper, 20% is equivalent to about 130 pumps. When the

costs of the top 130 pumps are summed together, the total spending is roughly $645,000

each year. Thus, at Irving Paper:

90% of the costs have been spent on 20% of the mill’s pumps.

Irving Paper’s pump reliability comes up below the 80/20 Rule by about 10%. By

making adjustments to the pumps at the top of the list and getting closer to the 80/20

divide, the mill should be able to cut its annual pump maintenance costs considerably.

Based on this information, the reliability team decided to start their individual pump

analysis with the most costly pumps.


4.2 MC 5 Sunds Defibrator Pump

Members of Irving Paper’s reliability team met with Dave Howe at Universal Sales

Limited (USL) in Saint John, NB to observe an air motor rebuild. While at USL, Mr.

Howe pointed out that IPI’s MC 5 Pump was there for a rebuild and that it was one that is

sent to them on a regular basis. The MC 5 Pump showed up at #8 on the list of highest

cost to maintain in the mill over the time period of this study. After looking at the work

order history and Failure Timeline Graph (see Figure 4 below) of this pump, it was seen

that lately it has had a seal failure roughly every six months.

Figure 4. MC 5 Pump Failure Timeline Graph

Each time the seal fails, the pump is taken out of service and sent to USL to have the

rotating assembly rebuilt or replaced, costing around $11,000 for parts and services each

failure. “A mechanical seal contains two rings with a high quality surface finish, one of

which is stationary whilst the other rotates with the pump shaft. Spring force and liquid

pressure hold the faces of the rings in contact with each other” (Sunds Defibrator, 1994).


The MC 5 Pump is a critical pump in the stock preparation process of the paper mill.

This pump is responsible for pumping all bleached stock from the bleached stock tower

to Paper Machine #1. If this pump fails, it will cease stock flow to the paper machine and

stop production until the failure has been resolved. There is no in-line spare and a pump

change would take hours to complete and cost the mill thousands of dollars in downtime.

By improving the reliability of this pump, rebuild costs due to seal failures could be

reduced, leading to significant financial savings.

It was pointed out by Dave Howe at USL that Irving Pulp & Paper (IPP- a sister mill to

Irving Paper) had a slightly larger Sunds Defibrator pump that had caused them similar

seal issues in the past. IPP’s pump is a 2025 model compared to Irving Paper’s 2015

model. The reliability group at IPI came up with a plan to modify the seal housing to

achieve a simpler design. This alteration involved shortening the stuffing box to allow

room for the installation of a new Chesterton 442 Split Mechanical Seal. “Eliminating

process leakage stops the problems created by it – premature bearing and equipment

failure, and the need to disassemble these large pumps to install new bearings and other

damaged components” (Chesterton, 2001).

Staff at Irving Paper first looked into the operating conditions of the pump and noticed

that there were discrepancies with the seal water setup and that the operation of the

associated vacuum pump seemed to need more monitoring. Figure 5 shows a cross-

section of the mechanical seal of the MC 5 pump.


Figure 5. MC 5 Pump Seal Cross-Section

There were two seal water lines entering the stuffing box of the pump, each controlled by

a flowmeter. The flowmeter for the quench line was recommended by personnel to be set

at 2 litres/min but was set at 8 litres/min. The flowmeter for the flushing line was

recommended by personnel to be set at 8 litres/min and was set at 8 litres/min.

However, when the pump manual was consulted, it recommended the lines be set at 2-3

litres/min and 1-2 litres/min respectively. Discrepancies between recommended set points

and actual set points may be a contributing factor to seal failures, an issue warranting

further investigation.

When examining the drain line exiting the stuffing box running into the floor trench, it

was seen that there was hardly any water coming out. This indicates one of three

possibilities: the seal water lines were clogged and very little water was getting to the

seal, the water was leaking by the seal and mixing with the stock in the pump, or it was

entering the stuffing box and getting sucked out by the degassing pump.


The seal water set up is crucial to cooling the stationary and rotating components of the

seal. If there is no seal water flow and these components are not kept cool, the seal will

fail and fill up with stock. See figures 6 and 7 for pictures of the seal face that has failed:

Figure 6. Seal Face Crack Figure 7. Seal Face Gouge

Notice the crack in the Figure 6; this crack shows that the seal likely experienced thermal

shock or was ran dry of its seal water. The gouge out of the face of the seal in Figure 7

shows that stock likely worked its way between the seal faces and caused a chunk of the

seal face to break off. After this failure took place, there would be no hope in stopping

the stock from passing through the seal and causing more problems.

IPI’s reliability team contacted staff at Irving Pulp & Paper to get some insight on the

changes they made. A meeting was set up on-site at USL to go over the modifications

with personnel from USL and IPP. The two pumps were set up side by side for the group

to examine; they were able to see that the two pumps were identical other than the seal

modifications and their size.


The essence of the changes undergone was the shortening of the stuffing box and the

replacing of the existing mechanical seal with a 442 Split Seal. The benefit from this

transformation is that split mechanical seals are able to be removed and changed with the

pump in place; there is no need to go through the lengthy, costly and labour intensive

process of removing and disassembling the pump just to change a failed seal.

Figure 8. Existing Stuffing Box

In order to complete this change, the seal housing will have to be cut back to about half

its current size and the port for the degassing pump moved as far to the pump side of the

stuffing box as piping will permit. The slinger on the motor side of the stuffing box

could be replaced with a more modern and smaller V Ring to serve the same purpose;

both would protect the bearings from leaking seal water. Collaboration with A.W.

Chesterton and USL should be had to further discuss the details of this modification if so

desired.


5.0 CONCLUSION

The goal of this study was to determine ways in which IPI could reduce maintenance

costs and improve the overall reliability of their pump systems. This was done by

identifying and locating all pumps in the mill and examining current pump-related

spending. It was found that there are roughly 650 pumps throughout the mill at Irving

Paper. Excluding labour, about $711,000 is spent each year on the overhaul of these

pumps alone and 90% of these costs were spent on 20% of the pumps.

For the time period studied (Jan. 1st, 2009 to Sept. 27th, 2014), the most costly pumps

were successfully identified and targeted for further investigation:

PM2 Kobe Pump #1 $170,809

Vacuum Pump- Pickup Uhlebox $139,723


Couch High Vacuum Pump $102,781

Trim Slitter Unit #2 Pump $98,418

PM2 Vacuum Sump Pump #2 $89,446

HRU Recirculation Pump $86,401

MC Pump 5- Bleached TMP Tower $82,703

Trim Slitter Unit #1 Pump $79,518


The main failure causes were seen to be seals and then bearings, respectively; this is an

extrapolation of the inconsistent work order data after having gone through the comments

and failure codes on many of the rebuild work orders.


6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 MC 5 Pump

Based on the analyses presented in this report, it is recommended that Irving Paper

further investigates the seal water supply and the associated vacuum system on the MC 5

Pump. The current operating conditions suggest that there is insufficient seal water

entering the stuffing box to cool the mechanical seal. It is assumed that this is likely from

partially clogged seal lines - the quality of the entire mill seal water system should be

checked.

By shortening the stuffing box and replacing the existing mechanical seal with a 442 Split

Seal or equivalent, seal failures will likely be reduced. Simplifying the sealing

arrangement of the MC 5 pump will be extremely beneficial to preventing failures of this

pump system. In addition to reducing pump failures, these changes will reduce the

difficulty and complication of future seal replacements; split mechanical seals are able to

be removed and changed with the pump in place. In other words, there is no need to go

through the lengthy, costly and labour intensive process of removing and sending the

pump to a rebuild shop for each failure. In order to complete these changes, the seal

housing would need to have major modifications completed and cooperation with A.W.

Chesterton and Universal Sales Limited would be ideal, since they have done this same

project at Irving Pulp & Paper within the last few years.


6.2 Changes to Procedures

It is recommended that Irving Paper follows the Shewhart Plan→Do→Check→Act

cycle for continuous improvement (Tague, 2004). IPI should consider working on or

implementing the following points and processes:

Work Order Detail - The detail on the majority of work orders is very minimal and

an improvement would allow data collection to be done easier and with more

accuracy.

Track Rebuilds - USL receives little or no information when a pump is sent to

them; this definitely costs the mill when they are unsure of the failure cause and

complete an unnecessary full rebuild. Records from USL should be added to the

work order detail after they have been received.

Enterprise One Swim lanes - Already established E1 swim lanes should be

followed to ensure the appropriate individuals are aware when and why a pump is

sent out for a rebuild.

Root Cause Failure Analysis - Allocate resources to perform RCFA techniques

and resolve the cause of the failure rather than change out the same piece of

equipment multiple times per year without an investigation.

Track Rework - Monitor pumps that have had improvements done to them to see if

the problem has been resolved or if it is still ongoing.

Expand To Other Areas of Budget - An analysis like the one outlined in this report

could be expanded to other areas of the maintenance budget to better track costs.

By following the above recommendations, it is expected that pump reliability at Irving

Paper will substantially improve. Increasing reliability of the pump systems at IPI will

result in vast savings by reducing maintenance costs and downtime.


References

Medium Consistency Pump CMD Maintenance Instructions, Sunds Defibrator AB, Sundsvall, Sweden, 1994, pp. 25-28.

JD Irving. World first technology, brilliant results [Online]. Available: https://www.jdirving.com/jd-irving-products-services-forestry-products-irving-paper.aspx

G. Mackenzie, private communication, Nov. 2014.

F. J. Reh. (2014). Pareto’s Principle- The 80-20 Rule [Online]. Available: http://management.about.com/cs/generalmanagement/a/Pareto081202.htm

442 Split Mechanical Seal, Chesterton, Stoneham, MA, 2001.

N. R. Tague. The Quality Toolbox (2nd ed.), ASQ Quality Press, 2004, pages 390-392.

Pump Reliability Study: Irving Paper Last Modified: December 18th, 2014

APPENDIX A

PARETO CHARTS BY MILL SECTION


PM1 Pump Entities in Order of WO Cost(1/1/09 to 9/27/14)



PM2 Pump Entities in Order of WO Cost (1/1/09 to 9/27/14)



TMP Pump Entities in Order of WO Cost(1/1/09 to 9/27/14)



APPENDIX B

TOP TEN PUMP DETAILS


1PM2246

91PM2 Kobe Pump #1

Kobe: Rotojet 9 W/Os$170,8

09

Date W/O No. W/O DescriptionFailure Type

Total Comments

25-Jan-09 642679 REPLACE PUMP LEAKAGE $13,619

10-Apr-09 659060 REPLACE PUMPNORMAL

WEAR$23,011

10-Aug-10 757995 CHANGE PUMPABNORMAL WEAR

$13,979

9-May-11 813512REPLACE KOBE PUMP

LEAKAGE $15,994

23-Jul-12 900643 REPLACE PUMPNOT

FAILURE RELATED

$14,305

2-Nov-12 943462REPAIR DISCHARGE PIPE

LEAKAGE $30,430

26-May-14 1013557TCC REPIPE KOBE PUMPS

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$43,733

this work order is to cover the cost of having the suction and discharge piping on the kobe pumps replaced.

REPLACED VALVES WITH VALVES THAT WERE CUT OUT AND WORKED FINE. NEEDS FURTHER INVESTIGATION. NOW HAS 2" OIC SWING CHECK VALVES.

19-Aug-14 1075458CHANGE THIS PUMP-SEAL LEAKING

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$12,044

27-Jan-14 1013556 TCC BASE REPAIRNOT

FAILURE RELATED

$3,694

to cover cost of repair to exisiting base and regrout new sill plate.

existing base - sill plate hollwo underneath and grout falling apart. New base ordered. had to re-drill a few holes - drawing modified.base levelled and grouted.

vibration checked and results good


2PM2255

04

Vacuum Pump - Pickup

Uhlebox

Nash 6 W/Os$139,7

23


Total Comments

27-Feb-09 644729PREP FOR VAC PUMP CHANGE

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$1,446

27-Jun-09 674880CHANGE OUT VAC PUMP

BEARING $25,438

7-Jul-09 651067REBUILD PM2 SPARE VAC PUMP

BEARING $34,115

3-Nov-09 674916REBUILD VAC PUMP

BEARING $30,254

11-Apr-14 1046361REPLACE VAC PUMP

LEAKAGE $43,280

Seal leak non drive end of 7L11 vacuum pump.

Water going into bearing housing. Please prep for change out

19-May-14 1054844COMPLETE VAC PUMP CHANGE

LEAKAGE $5,190

Need to complete the pump install.

Blanks need to be removed, pump re-alignment and recoupled.


3PM22466

4PM2 Kobe Pump #3

Kobe: Rotojet 9 W/Os $124,921

Date W/O No. W/O Description Failure Type Total Comments

5-Mar-10 722736 REPLACE PUMPNORMAL

WEAR$18,139

8-Mar-11 834972 CHANGE OUT KOBE LEAKAGE $13,878

15-Jun-11 798302 REPLACE KOBE PUMP LEAKAGE $13,437

16-Sep-11 819838 CHANGE OUT KOBE LEAKAGE $10,909

9-Aug-12 905576 CHANGE BELT/PUMP BELT $15,108

22-Aug-12 915655 C/O PUMPNOT FAILURE

RELATED$6,897

22-Sep-12 922977 REPLACE PUMP LEAKAGE $29,999

12-Nov-12 913782PURCHASE NEW KOBE PUMP

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$6,260

4-Dec-12 907437 WELD REPAIRS LEAKAGE $10,294

4 PM1255 Couch NASH 3 W/Os $102,7


21High

Vacuum Pump

81

Date W/O No.W/O

DescriptionFailure Type Total Comments

1-Jan-09 511947CHANGE DRIVE END BEARING

BEARING $5,931

Vibration showing Outer race defect and looseness. shaft is visibly moving. Both bearings replaced, however the journals are badly worn and requires further repairs.

Time line completed and follow items for review. -Marc

25-Jul-11 827309

REPLACE GEARBOX-BEARING DEFECT

NOT FAILURE RELATED

(BEARING)

$91,816 Bearing defects on output shaft

of gearbox. Trend increasing. -Ken Squires

20-Dec-12 935445

ALIGN GEARBOX/MOTOR/PUMP

ALIGNMENT $5,034

Check gearbox alignment. Increasing vibration suspected to be caused by soft foot condition. Gearbox was replaced in March 2012. Check coupling gaps.

Do not just tighten down bolts on the gearbox as it may twist the gearbox housing creating problems with gearmesh alignment and vibration.

Have ACT come in to inject the pump base along with the alignment of the gearbox and motor.


5PM12461

39

Trim Slitter Unit #2 Pump

JET-X 8 W/Os$98,41

8


Total Comments

7-Dec-09 706238REPLACE INTENSIFIER

LEAKAGE

$1,740 The intensifier has a leak and

needs to be repaired.

12-Jun-09 672137TCC OF CYLINDER REPAIR

LEAKAGE

$1,690

5-May-10 736427PAPRIMA INTENSIFER CYLINDER RE

LEAKAGE

$3,023

2-Jun-10 742580PAPRIMA INTENSIFER CYLINDER RE

LEAKAGE

$2,804

30-Jun-11 822973 REBUILD PUMPLEAKAG

E$890

26-Sep-13 997830REBUILD HP CYLINDER SEALS

SEAL $3,138 rebuild HP cylinder. water

leaking into the oil system.

1-May-13 965519INTENSIFIER FAILURE

LEAKAGE

$2,791 intensifier failure error coming

up on unit. Test and rebuild cylinder if necessary.

20-Jan-14 1026457PAPRIMA INTENSIFER FAILURE

LEAKAGE

$82,342

Monday January 20th ,2014 intensifer failure.

SEE FAILURE REPORT FOR DETAILS. HEAD BOLTS ON INTENSIFIER FAILED.


6PM2246

27

PM2 Vacuum Sump Pump

#2Byron Jackson 7 W/Os $89,446


Total Comments

28-Jan-09 644164 REMOVE PUMP/REPAIR SHAFT $15,177

28-Apr-09 662714 INSTALL PUMP SHAFT $1,560

4-Oct-10 768571 REBUILD SUMP PUMP LEAKAGE $673

10-Nov-10 776782REBUILD PUMP ASSEMBLY

ABNORMAL WEAR

$20,607

26-Sep-12 916629 PULL PUMPNORMAL

WEAR$1,078

27-Sep-12 916802INSTALL VERT SUMP PUMP

LEAKAGE $45,487

8-Aug-13 986434REPLACE DISCHARGE VALVE

ABNORMAL WEAR

$4,864


7GW62461

4

HRU Recirculatio

n PumpAhlstrom 13 W/Os

$86,401


10-Mar-09 653263 C/O SEALNOT FAILURE

RELATED$750

29-Oct-09 698165C/O PUMP & MECH SEAL

SEAL $8,309

THE SEAL HAS BEEN LEAKING TO LONG WE NEED TO CHANGE OUT THE PUMP ALSO

16-Mar-10 726294REPLACE PUMP & MECH SEAL

SEAL $7,787

used stock # 34330045 and changed it from a dynamic seal to a mechanical seal

4-Jun-10 743454CHANGE PUMP OUT

BEARING $7,389

6-Jul-10 751680TCC OF EMERGENCY SPARE PUMP

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$11,076

WE NEED A SPARE JUST FOR THE INSTALLATION. DAVE HOWE MADE ONE FOR US

19-Oct-10 771851 REPLACE SEALNOT FAILURE

RELATED$22,609

28-Jan-11 791498SEAL LEAKING - REPLACE

LEAKAGE $1,003

8-Mar-11 801277TCC OF REBUILD

SEAL $4,551

17-Mar-11 803051PURCHASE SEAL

SYSTEM IMPROVEMEN

TS$4,428

24-Aug-11 833460TCC RETROFIT PUMP FOR SPARE

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$7,022

28-Sep-11 840583 purchase partsSYSTEM

IMPROVEMENTS

$4,466

18-Jan-12 864763REBUILD SPARE AT USL

SEAL $2,636

new seal started to leak - replaced with spare and spare is at usl being repaired seal went to edmonton to be repaired

17-Dec-13 1017654REPLACE ROATING ASSEMBLY

ABNORMAL WEAR

$4,375 Seal leaking and rotating

assembly needs to be replaced


8GW62469

1

MC Pump 5 - Bleached

TMP Tower

Sunds Defibrator

9 W/Os$82,70

3


22-Feb-11 798218SEAL LEAKING - CHANGE PUMP

SEAL $7,107 The seal is leaking badly

and needs to be changed.

11-Apr-11 808072 CHANGE SEAL SEAL $3,478 Seal is leaking stock.

12-May-11 814824TCC OF REBUILD PARTS FOR USL

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$14,717

these parts are being purchased for usl so they can rebuild our rotating assembly for mc5. The parts will be sold to USL to cover the costs. - MAY12/11 - KAB

6-Feb-12 868290 SEAL LEAKING - C/O PUMP

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$16,811

17-Dec-12 934059MECH SEAL LEAKING-C/O PUMP

SEAL $10,627

17-Apr-13 962615TCC OF REPAIRS FOR USL

NORMAL WEAR

$457

parts from usl parts list to rebuild spare rotating assembly IPI stock # 28122710

8-Aug-13 986462REPLACE ROTATING ASSEMBLY

HIGH VIBRATION

$9,440 HIGH VIBRATION.

CHANGE ROTATING ASSEMBLY

29-Jan-14 1023297CHANGE OUT PUMP

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$11,737 leaking lots of water

20-Jun-14 1061999REPLACE ROTATING ASSEMBLY

LEAKAGE $8,329 USL Changed out the

pump.


9PM12461

38

Trim Slitter Unit #1 Pump

JET-X 13 W/Os$79,51

8

Date W/O No.W/O

DescriptionFailure Type

Total Comments

12-Jun-09 672136TCC OF CYLINDER REPAIR

LEAKAGE $1,150

23-Jun-09 674345REPLACE HEAT EXCHANGER

UNKNOWN

$335 Heat exchanger unit requires

replacement. Identified by Nick Lawson during rounds.

16-Jul-10 753862INSPECT REPAIR INTENSIFIER

LEAKAGE $11,990

7-Sep-10 763209OVERHAUL PAPRIMA

LEAKAGE $3,368

15-Mar-10 726141 Overhaul Pump LEAKAGE $813 O/H intensifier

31-Aug-11 834841REBUILD PAPRIMA UNIT

ABNORMAL WEAR

$6,100

16-Oct-11 836341CHANGE FOOT VALVES

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$2,204

6-Oct-12 918366CHANGE HIGH PRESSURE CYLINDER

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$9,473

15-Aug-12 908841REPLACE CYLINDER

LEAKAGE $8,284 Leaky Intensifier cylinder. Please

replace and identify cause of failure. Please replace filters at same time

18-Jun-12 896828 REPAIR PUMP LEAKAGE $5,627 cut failed on this pump. Looks like it

has an oil leak. Probably will need tp rebuild the inner-sub assembly.

5-Jun-12 894755MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS

NOT FAILURE RELATED

$2,435

Make necessary repairs to "up stream" trim squirts at the Wire. Currently these units are not being used< but they will be needed on heavier weights after the June 27th shut.

Please ensure all nozzle assemblies are fully intact and all the hoses are in place prior to the shut on June 27th.

16-Dec-13 1016412CHANGE OUT FILTER SET

FILTER FAILURE

$15,167

10-Oct-13 1019558REPAIR PAPRIMA INTENSIFIER

ABNORMAL WEAR

$2,854 One of the filter housings are cracked

st#6028420 they are in stores but not yet recieved.


10 PM224663PM2 Kobe

Pump #2

Kobe: Rotojet

5 W/Os $79,303


Total Comments

16-Feb-10 721107CHANGE OUT PUMP

BEARING

$18,213

6-Dec-12 958564INTERNAL SEAL LEAKING

LEAKAGE

$13,975

20-Jun-13 975682 REPLACE PUMP SEAL $30,260

13-Jul-14 1067812CHANGE OUT PUMP

NORMAL WEAR

$10,102

15-May-14 1054363CHANGE THIS PUMP

NOT FAILURE RELATE

D

$6,753 This Pump was Installed

on May 15th2014



APPENDIX C

MILL ENTITY NUMBER



Mill Area CodeEach area in the mill is represented by its own two or three-digit code that states the equipment location in the mill. A few examples used in this report are:

PM1 – Paper Machine #1GW3 – Thermal Mechanical

Pulping (TMP) Line 3TP – Thermal Plant

Specific Number

Each piece of equipment in the same area and class has its own specific number. This number would start at 001 and continue for however many pieces of equipment there are in said area.

Equipment ClassEach piece of equipment in the mill has an equipment class number that describes the type of equipment it is. In this report, the following three equipment classes are studied:

211 – Hydraulic Pumps255 – Vacuum Pumps246 – All Other Pumps

PM1-246-120

Documents

Pump Reliability Study