Page 12 - Improving Machinery Reliability

Finally, we should a11 recognize the interwoven relationship of so
many of the requirements and issues. It is important to realize that we
can logically hold someone accountable for quality and solid perfor-
mance only after training that person. Progress implies change. Change
implies risk and extra effort to manage the risk. We can better justify,
specify, purchase, install, operate, and maintain process plant machinery
only if we invest time and money up front in reading and learning about
best available practices. That, of course, is what this book is all about.
Many of my colleagues in process plants, machinery manufacturing
facilities, or in the consulting field are practitioners of the various relia-
bility improvement or assurance approaches. And for allowing me to
include some of their work in this revised and updated text, sincere
thanks go to Paul Barringer, whose work on life cycle costing and relia-
bility assessment is truly unique; Lou Bewig for some excellent work on
benchmarking; Gary Bostick (Woodward Governor) for a concise write-
up on modern turbomachinery controls; R. Ellis and M. Galley (Dow)
for documenting task descriptions used in best-of-class maintenance;
Galen Evans (Ludeca) for quantifying the reliability impact of laser-
optic alignment issues; s. Gupta and John Paisie (Sun Oil Company) for
groundbreaking work on the value-related definition of turnaround
scope; Bill Key (Flowserve), W. Schoepplein, and J. Nasowicz (Dich-
tungswerke Feodor Burgmann), Bill Adams, W. Binning, and R. Phillips
(Flowserve), Jim Netzel and P. Shah (John Crane) all of whom con-
tributed lucid material on modern sealing technology; John s. Mitchell
for his always authoritative and equally compelling summary of the
direction in which maintenance efforts must be channelled in the twen-
ty-first century; L. C. Peng for his contribution on pipe stress issues;
Jean Revelt (Lincoln Electric) for neatly explaining important reliability
aspects of electric motors; R. Ricketts (Solomon Associates) for shed-
ding considerable light on rigorous benchmarking; and to Paul Smith for
his observations on the “knowledge worker” who is certain to be needed
to deal with reliability issues from this day on.
Their contributions and those of others whose personal and/or compa-
ny names are mentioned in footnotes and captions are gratefully
acknowledged.

Heinz P Bloch, I? E.

ix