Crude oil prices have fluctuated significantly over the past 12 months, with a recent sharp increase in 2026 due to the crisis in the Middle East, while global lubricating oil prices remain relatively stable and do not directly track crude oil volatility.

An analysis of the monthly average crude oil prices (spot average of Brent, WTI, and Dubai in USD per barrel) and price estimates per liter for lubricants such as ISO 46 mineral hydraulic, engine synthetic, ISO 320 mineral and synthetic current shows that now there is no significant variation and depends more on brands and volumes.

Lubricants do not immediately reflect changes in oil due to long-term contracts and stocks.

Why is there no rise in lube oil prices if there was a rise in oil prices?

Lube oil prices have not risen immediately despite the recent increase in crude oil (from ~60 USD/barrel to 95 USD in March 2026) due to several structural factors in the industrial supply chain.

Main reasons

• Delay in the production chain: The oil is refined into base oils, a process that takes 2 to 6 months. Lubricants use stocks purchased at previous prices, cushioning rapid rises.
• Long-term contracts: Lubricant manufacturers sign fixed agreements (3 to 12 months) for base oils and additives, which represent between 70 and 80% of the final cost of the product, but are not adjusted daily like spot crude.
• Low proportion of crude oil: Only 50 to 70% of the lubricant is petroleum-derived base oil; the rest are imported additives (20-40%), packaging and margins, diluting the impact a little more, 10 to 20% of the final price.
• Isolated volatility: The oil base markets have their own dynamics (refinery supply, technical shutdowns, scheduled maintenance); they do not follow Brent/WTI 1:1.
• Stable demand and competition: Industrial, hydraulic, or gear lubricants, for example, are sold in large volumes with negotiated prices, without the “rocket-feather effect” as marked as in fuels.

Comparison with fuels

•  The stability of oils reflects robust supply chains and low spot volatility, although gradual increases may be beginning to be felt in some countries and may soon become a practice globally.
• The war in the Middle East (which began on February 28, 2026) has caused significant disruptions in the global production of petroleum derivatives, including lubricants such as those in the table above, although the effects on lubricants are more indirect and later than on fuels.

Confirmed impacts on petroleum derivatives

• Fall in crude oil supply: Up to 8 million barrels per day less (IEA, March 2026), due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz (20% of world oil), cuts in the Persian Gulf (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc.), and attacks on Iranian and regional refineries.
• Affected refineries: Shutdown of complexes in Iran, Qatar, and others, reducing capacity to produce base oils (raw material for lubricants). These impact derivatives such as gasoline, diesel, and lubricants.
• Lubricants specifically: what we can expect in the following months

• • Price increase announced (not immediate shortages)
  • Rising energy, transport, and raw material prices
  • Lubricant refining process (vacuum distillation + hydrogenation) depends on stable crude
  • Outages lead to delays of 1 to 3 months

 Table of effects by product type

Impact of the rise in oil prices on these economies

The rise in oil prices generates energy inflation, but the large economies can cushion through diversification and reserves.

• Importers (China, India, Japan, Germany, Brazil, UK, France): Cost increase by 10 to 20% in transport/industry.
• Exporters (Russia, Indonesia): They will generate extra profits and have plans to invest in local refining.
• USA: Minimal impact, less than 2%, refiners increase their profit margins.

Effect on demand and stock of lubricants

Although most countries have not yet seen a direct impact on end-user prices, the situation is not stable, and the impact is expected to materialize sooner or later.

Conclusions and recommendations

If you can negotiate the prices and purchase volumes of your plant and depend on the region where you are located, you can apply any of the following recommendations:

• The stock in Europe, the US, and China in the next 2 to 6 months is stable and there will probably not be a price increase, unless producers take advantage of this scenario; but if the conflict continues for more than months, there is a possible strangulation of the production chain with an immediate impact and increases in industrial oils starting in the summer.
• The 10 largest economies in the world and the surrounding countries are facing possible inflation, but they maintain a lubricant demand, as the industry is inelastic. This means that even though lubricant prices are likely to rise, the industry needs to buy what it needs.
• Secure short- to medium-term stocks with your lubricant supplier, or prioritize advanced purchases of the most-consumed products in your plant.
• Invest wisely in training for your maintenance personnel, in applications and tools that allow you to keep the lubricant in proper conditions and in lubricant analysis with which you ensure that when discarding oil it is because it no longer fulfills any of its main functions for which it has been designed and can have a negative impact on the lubricated component and the availability of the machine.

Moving Beyond Detection to Deliver Reliability

For maintenance managers and reliability professionals, identifying a problem is only the beginning. The real objective is preventing it from happening again.

In demanding industries with processing and manufacturing equipment that operate under high loads, harsh environments, and tight production schedules, when a gearbox, hydraulic system, or bearing fails, the cost extends far beyond replacement parts. Uptime, safety, and production are on the line.

Oil analysis plays a critical role in early detection. But when advanced diagnostics are applied, it becomes a powerful tool for root cause investigation.

Routine Testing Identifies the Symptom

Standard oil analysis parameters like wear metals, contamination levels, viscosity, oxidation, and particle counts are essential for trending and early warning. They answer important questions like: Is wear increasing? Is contamination entering the system? Is the lubricant degrading prematurely?

However, for reliability engineers tasked with eliminating repeat failures, elevated iron levels or rising particle counts just aren’t enough. Those results identify the symptom – not the failure mechanism.

Understanding the mechanism is what drives corrective action to prevent future problems.

Filter Debris Analysis: Examining What the Filter Captures

In high-load applications common in production and manufacturing operations, significant wear debris is often captured by the filter before it can be detected in a standard oil sample.

Filter Debris Analysis retrieves and evaluates that trapped material, providing a clearer picture of active damage. Using Analytical Ferrography and Micropatch testing to examine particle size, morphology, and composition, analysts can determine whether the debris originates from rolling element fatigue, gear tooth spalling, severe sliding wear and even break-in conditions versus progressive failure.

For a maintenance manager, this level of detail supports informed, smarter decisions; to continue operating under monitoring, schedule a controlled shutdown, or take immediate action. It replaces guesswork with evidence.

Define the Wear Mode

Analytical Ferrography testing uses magnetic separation and microscopic examination to characterize wear particles in detail. This method distinguishes between wear modes and can answer these questions:

Are wear particles caused by rubbing wear during normal operation?
Is it cutting wear caused by abrasive contamination?
Is lubrication film failure causing severe sliding wear?
Is it fatigue wear caused by surface distress?
Are chemicals causing corrosive wear?

For facilities where contamination control and lubricant performance are critical, identifying the wear mode is often the turning point in a root cause investigation.

For example, severe sliding wear may indicate inadequate viscosity selection or excessive load. Cutting wear often traces back to contamination control deficiencies in breathers, seals, or overall maintenance practices. Fatigue wear may reveal misalignment or load distribution problems.

Without microscopic confirmation, these distinctions are difficult to make. With it, corrective actions become targeted and sustainable.

Microscopic Contaminant Identification: Finding the Entry Pathway

Contamination remains one of the leading root causes of equipment failure across all industries. Advanced microscopic analysis can identify:

• Silica from environmental dirt
• Process materials unique to processing and manufacturing facilities
• Fibers from filters or cleaning materials

Reliability managers can use this information to address ingress points, refine storage and handling practices, or adjust filtration strategies. Instead of repeatedly changing oil, facilities can eliminate the source.

Turning Data Into Reliability Strategy

For reliability engineers, the goal is not simply monitoring machine health – it is building a no-surprises culture around asset performance.

Advanced oil analysis techniques such as Filter Debris Analysis and Analytical Ferrography transform a condition monitoring program into a diagnostic partnership. They provide evidence-based insight that supports root cause analysis, justifies maintenance planning decisions, and reduces repeat failures.

In high-demand production environments, that distinction matters.

Oil carries the story of what is happening inside your equipment. When you look beyond the numbers and examine the evidence, you move from reacting to failures to preventing them. And that is where real reliability gains are made.

Several years ago, I published an article titled, “How to Get Started with Onsite Oil Analysis: A Step-by-Step Guide”.  In that article, I outline 7 steps to developing a successful onsite program:

1. Developing an equipment criticality profile
2. Determining sampling frequency
3. Developing a sample test slate and alarms
4. Designing a lab
5. Designating a lubricant storage space (and keeping it tidy and clean)
6. Training
7. Software

Let’s build on that article and review some key advancements in the industry that are highlighted in Spectro Scientific’s TruVu 360^TM software and the new AI-enabled oil health forecasting tool, TruVu 360^TM Fluid IQ.  We will look at how the new features in the software can help with defining equipment criticality and risk, sampling frequency, and oil analysis alarms.

Equipment Criticality

Defining equipment criticality remains the first step in getting started with managing a program onsite.  There are several standard methods the end user can use to evaluate criticality, including ASTM 7874, Standard Guide for Applying Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) to In-Service Lubricant Testing, and ASTM D6224, Standard Practice for In-Service Monitoring of Lubricating Oil for Auxiliary Power Plant Equipment.

Once criticality is determined, reliability engineers need to use that information and incorporate it into the overall workflow of the oil condition monitoring program. That means prioritizing maintenance checks, sampling, and testing based on the risk profile.

In TruVu 360^TM, the equipment risk profile is defined using concepts from ISO 13381-2025.  Users can assign these risk levels within the TruVu 360^TM software, with TruVu 360TM Fluid IQ enabled, to each component.  Risk and recommendations from the software go hand in hand.  The greater the risk associated with the component, the more conservative the recommendations for sampling and oil changes.  An important concept to define early and evaluate often to ensure the program continues to meet the organization’s goals.

Sampling Frequency

Determining the sampling frequency for critical components is often the most complex part of setting up a program.  Reliability engineers can find themselves oversampling, but more commonly, not enough.  Relying on industry documentation and OEM’s has been the norm, but new advances in artificial intelligence have enabled smarter sampling strategies.

TruVu 360^TM Fluid IQ users now have the opportunity to implement smart sampling into their maintenance strategies. Building on the idea of risk evaluation, sampling recommendations are made using sampling history and historical trends, and comparing to a broad database of like-components, operating history, and sample history to forecast when the next sample needs to be taken. This strategy enables optimized sampling aligned with the condition rather than fixed schedules.

Alarms

Setting proper alarm levels is also a challenging part of managing an onsite program.  Again, OEM recommendations, ASTM standards, and reference materials are available to help.

Users may find the ideas outlined in ASTM D7720 helpful (ASTM D7720: Standard Guide for Statistically Evaluating Measurand Alarm Limits when Using Oil Analysis to Monitor Equipment and Oil for Fitness and Contamination).  ASTM D7720 outlines condition-based alarm concepts, helping users adjust alarm levels based on the component’s condition.

This methodology is particularly helpful for users who may have a large number of severe alarms to manage (and reduce) but simply can’t address everything at once.  The statistical models referenced in D7720 enable alarm adjustments based on historical data to effectively identify extremely elevated alarms and address maintenance concerns promptly.

By employing this approach as a systematic process, prioritizing and resolving the most significant alarms first, then reassessing after each stage, it is possible to incrementally return all alarms to their normal status.  When utilizing this technique, it is important to use the equipment criticality profile, which is directly correlated with safety, and ensure that adjusting alarms to support condition-based alarming, as outlined in ASTM D7720, is appropriate.

This condition-based alarming (ASTM D7720) concept is implemented in TruVu 360TM and can be easily applied if sufficient oil sample history is available for the component.

Software

There is software for every function of life, personal or work.  It can be overwhelming at times.  The key is to purchase software that offers the most options for quickly and effectively implementing an oil condition monitoring program onsite.  Spectro Scientific’s MiniLab with TruVu 360TM solution is a valuable tool for a complete, all-in-one oil analysis solution onsite.

With the new AI-enabled forecasting tool within TruVu 360^TM users can:

• Evaluate and record criticality of components using risk profiles
• Utilize AI to optimize sampling frequency
• Create condition-based alarms using ASTM D7720
• Utilize AI to predict the remaining useful life of the oil
• Understand limiting properties and catch issues early (even when the oil condition is normal)

Conclusion

It’s exciting to be part of the industry’s integration of AI techniques into onsite lab workflows. While the core principles of condition monitoring programs remain relevant, they are adapting to include advancements in AI.  If you would like more information about onsite oil analysis solutions, please reach out to me.

Learn More about TruVu 360 Fluid IQ

Oils are composed of base oils and additives. Typically, additives are sacrificial; they deplete first before the base oil is affected. As such, by trending their quantities over time, we can gain insight into a few of the conditions to which the oil is subjected.

By interpreting these conditions and patterns, we can correlate them with the health of the asset and plan accordingly for possible repairs or maintenance. In this article, we will do a deeper dive into ways these can be explored to add value to your asset management program.

Why Do Additives Matter?

Additives come in various ratios and chemical compositions, but when we talk about additives in oils, they really have three main functions. They can either;

• Enhance the properties of the base oil, which already exist
• Suppress the undesirable base oil properties or
• Impart new properties to the base oil

On their own, they cannot affect anything, but when coupled with a base oil, they can impact an asset. Base oils also have specific properties, which, when combined with additives, allow assets to perform at their best.

The real performance comes from how the additives and base oil work together.

As shown in Figure 1, some additives that enhance properties include antioxidants, corrosion inhibitors, anti-foam agents, and demulsifying agents. Those responsible for suppressing undesirable properties can include pour-point depressants and viscosity improvers.

Finally, those responsible for imparting new properties include extreme-pressure additives, detergents, metal deactivators, and tackiness agents.

Here are some quick descriptions for a few of these additives, which will help you to gain an appreciation of their functions:

Antioxidants: these protect the oil from oxidation. They are very common in Turbine oils but can be found in many other oils. They are the first line of defense when oxidation begins and react with free radicals to neutralize them before they attack the base oil. 

Corrosion inhibitors: adsorb onto the metal surfaces to help protect them. Comprised of sodium sulphonates, alkylbenzene sulphonates, or alkylphosphoric acid partial esters.

Anti-foam agents: reduce surface tension to break up foam formation. Typically, these are silicon-based, although silicone-free defoamers also exist.

Demulsifying agents: enable water and oil to separate. These were formerly composed of barium and calcium, but modern formulations use special polyethylene glycols.

Pour point depressant: alters oil crystallization, allowing the oil to form fewer crystals at lower temperatures.   

Viscosity improvers: specifically designed to ensure that the viscosity of the lubricant can be more tolerant of changes in temperature and shear.  

Extreme pressure additives: used under high stress to prevent the welding of moving parts. Usually comprised of a phosphorus compound.

Antiwear additives: designed to reduce wear under moderate stress. The most famous sulphur-phosphorus compound is ZDDP (Zinc Dialkyl dithiophosphate).

Detergents: keep oil soluble combustion products in suspension (especially for engine oils) and ensure they do not agglomerate. These usually contain metal additives such as Calcium and Magnesium.   

Understanding the function and composition of these additives can help us to determine how they are performing in the oil. Since many of these are sacrificial, their values will decrease over time. As such, it is important to trend these values to determine whether they are remaining constant, increasing, decreasing, or decreasing at an accelerated rate.

How Can Additives Deplete?

Additives can be depleted through different mechanisms. Some of these include:

• Regular consumption through normal functioning of the lubricant
• Antioxidant depletion during oxidation
• Antiwear depletion due to high wear on the inside of the equipment
• Additive depletion via a contaminant to produce a bleaching effect

As mentioned earlier, additives are sacrificial in nature. It is very normal to see additives deplete over time; if they are not depleting and increasing, this may be a cause for concern. This can mean that someone is topping up the oil frequently or perhaps topping up with an incorrect lubricant.

Since there are numerous oils on the market, the best way to monitor the depletion of your additives is to compare them against a new sample of that oil and use that as your baseline. Your lab will help you confirm when the additive limits are approaching the danger zones.

During oxidation, a free radical is formed under conditions such as heat, wear, metal catalysts, oxygen, or water. These free radicals are unstable, and antioxidants usually neutralize them.

In the process, antioxidant levels decrease. However, if the conditions still permit oxidation, more free radicals will be formed. This means that more antioxidants will be depleted as they neutralize the free radicals until they diminish and can no longer protect the base oil. This is when the free radicals begin to attack the base oil, and varnish can form.  

Once the antioxidants are gone, the oil stops defending – and starts degrading.

If there are causes of high wear, such as the incorrect viscosity of the lubricant (too thin) or the machine finishing of the inner parts of a component not being done to the required standard, this can affect the levels of antiwear in the oil. Antiwear additives protect the metal surfaces inside the equipment. However, these are only activated when moderate stress exists within the equipment.

Typically, in these situations, the antiwear additive adheres to the metal surface and helps protect it by forming a layer. Once this layer is formed, the antiwear additive has officially left the oil, and this will be reflected in a decrease in its value in the oil analysis report.

The layer will not remain forever, and due to wear on the equipment, it can be worn off and replaced by a new layer, leading to further depletion of the antiwear additives until there are no more to form another layer or protect the metal surface.

Contamination can also cause some additives to become depleted. Contaminants can react with additives, causing them to form deposits that leave the oil. Therefore, their presence will not be detected by oil analysis.

Some common contaminants are water, fuel, coolant, and acids. These contaminants can also promote the formation of catalysts for degradation mechanisms such as oxidation. Dirt and solid particles can also promote additive depletion, especially when they act as catalysts. 

What Tools Can Be Used to Monitor Additive Depletion?

There are some basic analytical tools that can be used to measure the quantity of additives in oils. The spectroscopy methods are the FTIR (Fourier Transform Infrared) and ICP (Inductively Coupled Plasma). Another method is the RULER® test exclusively designed for antioxidants.

With FTIR and ICP methods, users obtain quantitative values for the elements present in the tested oil sample. These are usually reported in ppm and trended over time. Figure 2 shows an extract from a Turbine Sample report from Eurofins lab, where the levels of additives (and contaminants) are shown. When trending this, analysts should pay attention to the rate at which these additives decrease and whether an increase or decrease is noticed.

Another tool that can be used is the RULER® (Remaining Useful Life Evaluation Routine) test, which specifically quantifies the levels of antioxidants remaining in the oil. It trends the values, compares them against the baseline for that oil, and then determines the change as a percentage.

If the RULER value falls below 25%, the antioxidant levels have reached a critical level, and one may consider replacing the oil. 

Figure 3 shows a RULER graph, which identifies the presence of different types of antioxidants (Amines) and antiwear additives (ZDDP), as well as oxidation products (Fluitec, 2022).

This is a comprehensive readout of the quantities of these additive types at the time of sampling. It is easy to get a quick snapshot of its trend over time and determine whether it is declining rapidly or reaching critical levels.

The key to using these analytical tools is to provide insight into what is happening inside the equipment, allowing us to determine whether any preventive action is needed.

By monitoring the quantities of these additives over time, we can easily establish whether oxidation is occurring, which can lead to varnish and overheating of the asset. We can also determine whether significant wear is occurring as the antiwear additives are depleted (confirmed by the presence of wear metals in the oil analysis). When monitoring your asset’s health, trending specific additive levels can also be very useful. 

References

Eurofins. (2025, September 06). Annual Turbine Analysis. Retrieved from Eurofins Testoil: https://testoil.com/services/turbine-oil-analysis/annual-turbine-analysis/

Fluitec. (2022, September 29). Why is LSV Used for RULER Analysis? Retrieved from Fluitec: https://www.fluitec.com/2022/09/29/why-is-lsv-used-for-ruler-analysis/

Oil analysis is widely recognized as one of the most potent tools in precision lubrication and reliability engineering. Yet, despite decades of industry experience, many organizations unknowingly undermine their effectiveness before the first sample is even taken.

A Real-World Example of a Hidden Oil Analysis Failure

Recently, we received an enquiry for an oil analysis call-off contract from a major industrial organization for their critical rotating machinery. The scope initially appeared comprehensive – until we examined the details. A closer review of the Scope of Work revealed a fundamental issue that, unfortunately, is becoming increasingly common across several industrial facilities.

The client attached the lubricant specification sheet, extracted directly from the OEM manual, assuming these parameters specified the tests to be performed on used oil samples during routine condition monitoring. When questioned regarding the selected oil analysis test package, the client reiterated that the OEM required the lubricant to meet the specifications stated in the Operation and Maintenance manual and therefore assumed that all such tests must be applied to used oil samples.

Where Oil Analysis Programs Go Off Track

This increasingly common assumption, observed in several recent cases, exposes a deeper industry-wide problem: a lack of understanding of what used oil analysis is intended to achieve.

New oil specifications and used oil analysis serve entirely different purposes.

OEM lubricant specification sheets are designed for one primary objective: To define the quality and performance requirements of fresh oil at the time of purchase and commissioning.

These specifications typically include properties such as:

• Viscosity grade limits
• Viscosity Index
• Flash point
• Pour point
• Density
• Rust-preventing characteristics
• Foaming characteristics
• Demulsibility
• Oxidation and ageing tests
• FZG or load-carrying capacity

All of these tests are essential – but only for qualifying new oil before it enters the system.

Once the oil is in service, the objective changes completely.

Used oil analysis is not about confirming what the oil was when it was new. It concerns understanding what is happening inside the machine at present.

Used Oil Analysis Is a Condition Monitoring Tool, Not a Compliance Checklist

In operating equipment – especially gas turbines, steam turbines, compressors, and hydraulic control systems – used oil analysis must answer particular reliability questions:

• Is the oil in healthy condition or degrading faster than expected?
• Is contamination entering the lubrication system?
• Are wear mechanisms developing inside bearings or gears?
• Is varnish or insoluble material forming?
• Are control valves, journals, or servo systems at risk?

Tests such as Pour point, Rust Prevention, Viscosity Index, or FZG ratings provide little to no actionable insight once the oil is in service. Meanwhile, critical failure mechanisms often go undetected when the wrong test slate is applied.

This is how organizations end up with beautiful laboratory reports but poor machine reliability.

What Goes Wrong When Spec Sheets Drive Your Oil Analysis Program

When OEM new-oil specifications are incorrectly used as an in-service oil analysis program, several things happen:

1. Early failure indicators are missed
   Parameters that actually trend degradation—such as varnish potential, water contamination, Particle cleanliness, and additive depletion—are either overlooked or underemphasized.
2. Oil analysis becomes reactive instead of predictive and proactive
   Issues are detected only after alarms, trips, or component damage occur.
3. Lubrication decisions lose credibility
   Maintenance teams receive reports that do not translate into clear actions, leading to distrust in oil analysis as a reliability tool.
4. Critical machinery reliability is compromised
   Bearings, journals, and hydraulic components fail prematurely – not solely due to oil quality, but also due to poor visibility into oil condition.

The True Purpose of Oil Analysis

To simultaneously assess three conditions:

1. Oil condition – how well the lubricant is holding up in service
2. Contamination condition – what unwanted materials are entering the system
3. Machine condition – what the oil is revealing about internal wear and distress of the machine.

When properly designed, an oil analysis program serves as an early-warning system, detecting degradation and failure mechanisms well before alarms, trips, or component damage occur.

However, this only works if the right tests are selected for the right purpose.

Before You Design an Oil Analysis Program, Audit Your Lubrication Practices

A robust oil analysis program should never be built by copying tables from OEM manuals.

Global best practice dictates that a Lubricant Benchmarking and Assessment Audit must precede the design of any oil analysis program.

A structured lubrication audit enables organizations to systematically identify gaps across all critical elements of machinery lubrication management.

• Lubricant Selection and Purchase
• Assess staff competency, training needs, and lubrication awareness
• Evaluate contamination control practices, including ingress prevention and filtration
• Review lubricant storage, handling, and dispensing methods
• Examine oil sampling practices and the condition monitoring program
• Verify machine-specific lubrication requirements and target cleanliness levels

Addressing these areas holistically ensures that oil analysis objectives are properly aligned with overall reliability and asset performance goals.

Oil Analysis Is Not a Lab Activity – It Is a Reliability Discipline

Oil analysis does not fail because laboratories lack capability. It fails because programs are often designed without a clear understanding of what needs to be detected, why it matters, and when it must be detected early.

The difference between oil analysis that merely reports numbers and oil analysis that prevents failures lies in program design, not testing volume.

More data doesn’t mean better reliability. Better questions do.

Oil analysis is one of the most powerful reliability tools available – when applied correctly. However, when new oil specifications are mistaken for used-oil condition monitoring, the entire purpose is undermined.

The industry does not suffer from a lack of data. It suffers from misaligned data.

Understanding the distinction between oil quality and oil condition is not a laboratory issue – it is a responsibility of reliability leadership.

Until that distinction is clearly understood, companies will continue to spend on oil analysis while still incurring unplanned downtime costs.

In industrial and manufacturing facilities, lubrication and condition-monitoring programs focus on equipment that runs every day, such as compressors, gearboxes, pumps, turbines, and hydraulic systems that keep production moving. These critical assets are often routinely sampled, trended, and reviewed because their failure has an immediate and visible impact on operations.

But there is another side to operations that often receives less attention until it’s urgently needed in emergencies: backup power generators.

When backup power fails, the consequences aren’t minor – they’re catastrophic. You can’t troubleshoot an oil problem during a grid failure.

Backup generators are expected to perform flawlessly under the worst possible conditions, during storms, grid failures, or emergency shutdowns. Yet many facilities treat them as “standby” assets rather than mission-critical ones. The reality is simple: when backup power fails, the consequences can be severe, resulting in lost production, safety risks, equipment damage, and costly downtime.

Fluid analysis plays a critical role in ensuring backup generators are ready on a moment’s notice in the event they’re needed to maintain uninterrupted operations.

Standby Equipment, High Consequences

Unlike continuously operating industrial equipment, backup generators may run infrequently or under variable conditions. Long idle periods, short test runs, and sudden load demands introduce unique risks that traditional time-based maintenance alone cannot fully address.

Oil degradation, fuel contamination, and coolant issues often develop quietly while generators sit idle. Without routine fluid analysis, these problems remain hidden until startup, and when it’s far too late to correct them.

The worst time to discover a fluid problem is the moment you need your generator to perform.

Treating backup generators with the same condition-based mindset applied to primary assets is essential for reliability.

Oil Analysis: More Than Just Hours on the Meter

Oil analysis is often associated with runtime hours, but for backup generators, time and environment can be just as damaging as operation.

Routine oil testing helps identify:

• Oxidation and oil degradation during extended idle periods through Viscosity, Oxidation, and Base Number (BN) testing
• Contamination from dirt, moisture, or coolant leaks using Elemental Analysis by ICP and Water Content
• Abnormal wear metals indicating internal component issues through Elemental Analysis by ICP and Ferrous Debris Monitoring testing
• Improper viscosity or additive depletion that can reduce engine protection and lead to accelerated wear

Trending oil results over time allows maintenance teams to distinguish between normal aging and developing mechanical problems. This is especially important for generators that may appear “healthy” based on limited run hours but are slowly deteriorating internally.

The Most Overlooked Risk: Diesel Fuel

Fuel quality is a leading cause of backup generator failure. Diesel fuel can degrade significantly during storage, especially when exposed to moisture, temperature fluctuations, or poor housekeeping practices.

Routine diesel fuel testing helps monitor:

• Water contamination and condensation through Karl Fischer testing
• Microbial growth that leads to sludge and filter plugging through Microbial and Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) testing
• Fuel stability through Thermal Stability and fuel acidity through Copper Corrosion testing
• Contamination through Viscosity and Flashpoint testing
• Identify fuel type and detect the presence of petroleum-based contaminants using Distillation, API Gravity, and Cetane Number testing
• Particulate contamination that can damage injectors using Particle Count testing and Elemental Analysis by ICP testing to detect signs of dirt and tank corrosion

Fuel-related issues often surface only during startup or load testing: exactly when reliability matters most. A proactive diesel fuel testing program enables corrective actions, such as fuel polishing, tank cleaning, or additive treatment, before an emergency occurs.

Coolant Analysis: Protecting the Engine You Can’t Afford to Lose

Coolant condition is critical to engine health, yet it is frequently under-tested in backup power systems. Depleted inhibitors, improper chemistry, or contamination can lead to corrosion, liner pitting, overheating, and premature engine failure.

Coolant analysis provides insight into:

• Freeze point and boil protection through Glycol Concentration and Freeze/Boil point testing
• Signs of glycol breakdown and degradation through Ion Chromatography
• Additive depletion and corrosion inhibitor health using pH, Reserve Alkalinity, Nitrite/Molybdate testing, and Organic Acid Monitoring through High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) testing
• Contamination from oil, diesel fuel, or external sources through Visual Analysis and Elemental Analysis by ICP
• Scale-forming minerals, improper coolant mixtures, and water quality indicators through Hardness, Chlorides, Sulfates, and Conductivity testing

Regular coolant testing ensures the cooling system can handle sudden load demands and temperature spikes when generators are required to run continuously.

Turning Fluid Data into Reliability

The value of fluid analysis lies not just in testing, but in using results to make smarter maintenance decisions. Trending oil, fuel, and coolant data together provides a comprehensive view of generator health and allows teams to prioritize actions based on condition rather than assumptions.

If you’re already trending fluid data on your primary assets, there’s no reason your backup generators should be flying blind.

For industrial facilities that already have strong lubrication programs in place, extending fluid analysis to backup generators is a natural and necessary step in maintenance planning.

Reliability Isn’t Optional

Backup generators may not run every day, but when they do, failure is not an option. Fluid analysis provides the earliest warning of developing issues and ensures these critical assets are ready when the unexpected occurs.

If your lubrication program protects the equipment that drives production, it should also protect the equipment that keeps everything running when production and safety are on the line.

Sometimes we can spend hours poring over technical data sheets, comparing oil performances, and finally selecting the “right” oil which aligns with the needs of our equipment. Then, within 2 months, the oil degrades, our machines shut down, and we have a bunch of maintenance repairs lined up. What went wrong? We clearly had the “right” oil in the equipment; everything should have worked beautifully. This is where the awareness of lubrication and its practices becomes critical.

Having the correct oil is only one part of the puzzle. Being able to deliver that oil in its purest, cleanest form to the machine is often one of the other pieces that go missing. Another piece is selecting the right oil, not just based on the sales guy’s advice, but on the actual operating conditions of your machine. In this article, we dive a bit deeper into ways you can align the right oil with the proper practices, or avoid the wrong ones, to help extend the life of your asset.

Spec Sheet vs Strategy

For this example, we will consider a turbine oil selection. If a customer wants to change the oil in their turbine, then they may consider the following:

• What are the OEM specifications that need to be met?
• Is this oil available from the local supplier?
• How does it compare to other oils on the market?
• Does the cost justify the value? (or will the purchasing department want something cheaper?

For most of these questions, engineers or the person tasked with selecting the oil can readily find the answers in the oil’s technical data sheet and by talking to their sales representative. But if we dive a bit deeper, are we selecting the right oil for the operating and environmental conditions? Let’s examine the selection of a turbine oil for the Siemens SGT 200 Gas turbine that meets the Siemens TLV 9013 04 specification.

As seen in this document from Shell Lubricants, a few of their products meet that specification, namely Shell Turbo T, Turbo S2GX, Turbo S4X & Turbo S4GX.

On the other hand, Mobil provides some solutions as well, namely, Mobil DTE 732, 746, or DTE 832, 846

Chevron also provides an option of Chevron GST as follows:

With so many options, how can one choose the “right” oil? They all meet the required Siemens specification, TLV 9013 04. This is where the data sheets, OEM manual, and knowledge of the equipment’s operating conditions play a crucial role.

As per the manual, there are preset conditions for temperatures and pressures, but if your actual system runs hotter (or production is being pushed a bit more), it is functioning outside the operating envelope.

The spec sheet tells you what the oil can do. Your operating conditions tell you what it must do.

Additionally, if your surroundings are harsh (close to the sea or in a corrosive environment, or in a non-ventilated area where heat can build up), these can place additional stress on the equipment. For these harsher conditions, a synthetic oil might be more appropriate than a mineral oil, albeit more expensive in terms of the initial investment.

The manual also specifies which tests/characteristics should be used to monitor the condition of the oil, namely: viscosity, particle count, water content, demulsibility, air release, foaming characteristics, RULER®, and MPC. Based on the performance of your current oil in the system, you can determine whether these values fluctuate toward the higher warning zones. This can also influence your decision about which oil to choose.

It’s not just about the right oil or one that aligns with OEM requirements. The selection should also be based on the environmental conditions of the oil and the equipment, and on whether the oil is suited to perform in these conditions. A mineral oil will not withstand the temperatures that a synthetic oil can for extended periods without degrading. Similarly, given the “right” conditions, synthetic oils can also degrade. By cross-examining your spec sheet, OEM manual, and actual conditions, you can determine the best-suited oil for your operations.

Common Modes of Failure

Regardless of the oil selected, common modes of failure can occur with every lubricant. These include: contamination, improper storage and handling practices, and environmental factors, as shown in Figure 4.

Contamination can be defined as any foreign particle entering the system. This includes any gases, liquids, or solids. Especially when the lubricant system runs alongside the process side, process gases and liquids can leak into the oil. These contaminants can influence the oil’s degradation, leading to deposits or chemical reactions that break it down. Common process contaminants include ammonia or treated water.

 The biggest threat to the right oil is often what gets added to it – whether it’s process contamination or the wrong oil during a top-up.

Another liquid that can contaminate oil is another oil. During top-ups, operators can add the wrong oil to the system, causing contamination and, depending on the oil, a possible shutdown. Adding motor oil to hydraulic oil can be catastrophic, as the additive packages work differently and the motor oil additives may counteract the hydraulic additives, removing them from the oil, leaving the asset open to wear and failure. Despite selecting the correct lubricant for your system, adding the wrong oil (mistakenly) will shorten its lifecycle and cause the asset to fail. 

Bad storage and handling practices can also erode your oil, regardless of the oil you choose. Turbine and hydraulic oils are used in precise equipment. As such, they need to be clean and free of dirt or other contaminants. However, if oils are not stored correctly, contaminants can enter and contaminate the oil.

Simple techniques, such as transferring oil from larger storage containers (pails, drums, or totes) into smaller, more manageable containers (2-3 liters or less), can introduce contaminants into the oil if not done correctly. If oils are to be transferred to another storage container, the storage container must be clean. The transfer process should use clean hoses (not previously used for another lubricant) and be completed in a dust-free environment.

If you wouldn’t use a dirty needle for a blood transfusion, why would you use a dirty hose for an oil transfer?

The transfer of oils from one container to the next can be thought of as a blood transfusion. Would you use dirty needles or vials to transport the blood to be placed into another human? Similarly, oil can be likened to the equipment’s lifeblood and should be treated accordingly. Just as we observe sterile practices for blood transfusions, we should also observe similar types of practices for oil transfers.

Environmental and operational factors can also influence lubricant degradation. As stated earlier, all lubricants can degrade over time under harsh conditions. The lubricant formulation largely influences this, as does whether it was blended to withstand those conditions.

Oxidation can easily occur when temperatures increase, free radicals are present, or when wear metals are present. Thermal degradation occurs when the temperatures exceed 200°C. On the other hand, microdieseling occurs in the presence of entrained air, despite the lubricant used in the system, as shown in Figure 5.

Any of these degradation mechanisms can occur regardless of the type of oil chosen. Hence, it is essential to remember that operational conditions and environmental factors can heavily influence oil degradation, even when the oil is appropriate for the system.

Role of Condition Monitoring

As mentioned earlier, choosing the right oil for the system is just one part of the puzzle. How do we know the oil is performing when it’s in the system? This is where condition monitoring can work hand in hand to help ensure that the oil does not fail the asset.

If a proper oil analysis program does not exist, operators will not know whether the oil is properly lubricating the asset. They will also not be aware of whether the oil is breaking down too quickly and failing to protect the asset. Oil analysis can also alert operators to signs of wear in the asset, so they can fix them before they turn into functional failures.

An oil analysis program that lives in a drawer protects assets about as well as no program at all.

There is also the possibility that an oil analysis program exists but is not top of mind, or that its results are put in a drawer. This can also cause the asset to fail even though the correct oil is being used. Apart from the aforementioned factors, if operators are not warned of the impending failure of the oil, this can result in production losses, increased downtime, and, in some extreme cases, the complete loss of the asset if it has failed beyond repair. 

Incorrect sampling is another area in which the actual condition of the asset is not reported. Even with the correct oil used, if a sample is collected from a dead leg or an area that is not truly representative of the conditions inside the component, its actual condition will not be known. With incorrect data about the component, the asset can be misdiagnosed or treated for symptoms that do not exist, which can lead to its detriment.

Human and Organizational Factors

Not all failures occur at the equipment level; human and organizational factors can also cause the asset to fail even when the correct oil is used. If humans aren’t properly trained in oil sampling techniques or storage and handling practices, these can affect the asset’s functionality. We often forget that, at the heart of it all, lies the human factor, which is partially governed by the organization’s systems.

Training needs are an organizational factor that is often overlooked when considering how an asset can fail. However, if operators have not been trained in condition monitoring techniques, they will not be able to read oil analysis reports or take appropriate actions to protect the asset. Training can help bridge some competency gaps that directly impact asset performance.

It doesn’t matter what oil is in the system if no one is trained to monitor it – or motivated to care.

Culture is another factor swept under the rug. If the culture doesn’t exist to look after the assets, it doesn’t matter what type of oil is placed in the system; the asset will fail eventually. The performance of the asset does not only rely on using the correct oil. By implementing a culture of Asset ownership, where operators look after the asset and are accountable for its performance, assets are optimized to provide the functionality they should. This is one way to ensure the right oil is used to enable the assets’ performance.

Another area of concern is the documentation of maintenance procedures. If maintenance procedures are not adequately documented, someone new to the operation may not be aware of the correct practice. This, coupled with a lack of training, can spell disaster for the equipment. In these cases, even though the right oil was selected, the wrong practice or lack thereof can fail the asset.

Turning the “Right oil” into the “Right Outcome.”

As explained in this article, improper practices can jeopardize the asset’s health, even when the right oil is used. However, if all the right things align, we can have an asset that lasts for its expected lifetime or beyond.

This starts with selecting the right oil based on the application, environmental conditions, and OEM recommendations. If we follow this up with good storage and handling practices, proper condition-monitoring programs, documentation, and training, we can look toward a longer-lasting asset. The right oil enables reliability – but only disciplined practices deliver it.

It is very likely that you have encountered the RPVOT (Rotating Pressure Vessel Oxidation Test), a laboratory test developed in the 1960s and later standardized by ASTM D2272. It measures the antioxidant stability of lubricating oils by accelerating oxidation in a rotary pressure vessel.

The most common result is an integer expressed in minutes that measures the time until the pressure drops by 25 psi from the initial maximum (T0 to T1) under conditions of 150°C, oxygen at ~90 psi, and a copper catalyst. Some labs include the graphic that most closely resembles one of the most famous drawings in Antoine de Saint-Exupéry’s book, An Elephant Inside a Boa Constrictor.

Although this laboratory test has a lot to say about the state and condition of the oil, it has been assumed that the result depends only on the numerical value, being that it is much more than a simple number, and knowing this test in slightly more detail can be very useful when planning the lubricant. In this article, we will analyze the oil’s behavior during this test from an energy perspective. We will examine the relationship with other laboratory tests and, finally, the application of new methodologies to assess the test’s performance.

Let’s look at three samples of the same type of oil, a zinc-free mineral oil designed for gas and steam turbines with antioxidant additives, rust and corrosion inhibitors, and anti-foaming agents. According to the technical sheet, the RPVOT test of the new oil reports 1000 minutes.

Remember that the objective of the test is to force the oxidation of the oil.

RPVOT Regions

PART 1: Graph Analysis

Oxidation Induction Region, Gas Heating and Expansion

An initial period where antioxidants (phenolics, amines, phosphorus) neutralize free radicals (ROO-, O2-) formed by temperature (150°C) and Cu, H2O, and O2 catalysts. In this phase, the gas’s thermal expansion predominates, water evaporates, but oxidation is still low.

• Graphically: Low slope (<0.05 psi/min), stable pressure ~192 psi.​
• Entropy: minimum ΔS (+10-19 J/mol· K); under molecular disorder.
• Gases: Very few volatiles (residual H2O).
• Duration: ~35-100 min; longer in sample 2 (additives in good condition).

Region of Propagation of Quasi-Stationary Oxidation

The primary antioxidants are exhausted; the oxidative chain begins when free radicals attack the hydrocarbons of the base oil, initiating a sequence of peroxide formation, aldehyde formation, and acid formation, leading to varnish (degradation byproducts). In this phase, O2 is rapidly consumed.

• Graphically: Tipping point, average slope (-0.05 to -0.2 psi/min), drop ~192→175 psi.
• Entropy: High ΔS (+25-32 J/mol· K); Disorder increases due to the increase in molecular fragments of the hydrocarbon chain.
• Gases: CO, CO2, volatile hydrocarbons cause ~10-20 psi drop.​
• Sample 3 has a steeper curve due to the consumption or condition of additives.

 Region of Termination or Pressure Drop

The secondary inhibitors present in this oil, such as phosphates, recombine the remaining radicals, and in this phase, the oxidation slows, but the presence of residues is evident, which can increase viscosity and AN.

• Graphically: Low slope (<-0.2 psi/min), stabilization ~170 psi.
• Entropy: moderate ΔS (+16-22 J/mol· K); residual disorder.
• Gases: Minimal, but there is evidence of varnish or accumulated sediment.
• Sample 2 is more stable; this is evidenced by a flat curve.

Analysis by Sample

Sample 2 (more stable, total ΔP ~22 psi in ~300 min): Low degradation, additives are efficient and limit clutter.​

• Induction Region (t≈48-100 min, 192.1→190.5 psi): ΔS = +10.2 J/mol· K and phenolic antioxidants intact.
• Propagation Region (100-220 min, 190.5→182 psi): ΔS = +24.8 J/mol·K. With a moderate concentration of peroxide.
• Termination Region (>220 min, 182→170 psi): ΔS = +16.5 J/mol·K. Total: +51.5 J/mol·K.

Sample 1 (mean degradation, ΔP ~23 psi): a higher initial additive consumption.​

• Induction Region (46-90 min, 192→183 psi): ΔS = +14.7 J/mol·K.
• Propagation Region (90-230 min, 183→173 psi): ΔS = +27.1 J/mol·K.
• Termination Region (>230 min, 173→169 psi): ΔS = +19.2 J/mol·K. Total: +61.0 J/mol·K.

Sample 3 (the most degraded, ΔP ~25 psi): High early oxidation.​

• Induction Region (35-80 min, 192→167 psi): ΔS = +18.9 J/mol·K. The exhausted phosphate additive is exhausted.
• Propagation Region (80-260 min, 167→160 psi): ΔS = +32.4 J/mol·K. Increase in volatile compounds and acid production.
• Termination Region (>260 min, 160→155 psi): ΔS = +22.1 J/mol·K. Total: +73.4 J/mol·K.

PART 2: Relationship with Other Laboratory Tests

The relationship between RPVOT and other laboratory tests is very weak and unreliable, and it is unlikely to predict a low RPVOT result.

Following our case study, we have:

On the other hand, the repeatability and reproducibility of the RPVOT is low and this greatly reduces its reliability when making a decision in case of results that do not meet the expectations of the end user.

So, what laboratory analysis can be a good ally when performing the RPVOT? As Table 2 shows, traditional tests do not correlate with RPVOT results. However, there are two analyses that do show potential problems and can be used to work in conjunction with this test; Differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) is a powerful electroanalytical technique designed to measure the concentration of redox-active species with high sensitivity and resolution, often allowing the detection of analytes at concentrations as low as 10^-8 to 10^-9 molar. The next is FTIR, which allows identifying compounds in the fluid.

PART 3: Price Matters and Goes Hand In Hand with Innovation

Depending on the country and laboratory, the cost of an RPVOT analysis is usually between 150 and 650 $US, with an estimated turnaround time for results easily exceeding 10 days, not only because of the time it takes to test but also because samples may be on hold. If it is simply to comply with the oil manufacturer’s recommendations or the turbine OEM’s warranty, the end user will pay little attention to the result or the graph in the report.

The analytical tools available to us today have facilitated many aspects of our lives, including data analysis and the detection of patterns that help us identify future behaviors. Within the scope of RPVOT, in mid-2024, I was fortunate to develop an analytical tool that I called RPVOT_[SYN]. Its function basically aims to minimize two key aspects of this laboratory test: time and cost.

Thus, by applying a Bayesian analysis, it is possible to determine with a degree of confidence greater than 75% what the expected result of the RPVOT of a turbine oil will be. For a fraction of the cost of the laboratory test and in less than 6 hours, you get a result very similar to this:

RPVOT_[SYN] : 180 – 200

Some Recommendations: What Is Important When Receiving the RPVOT Results?

We said before that the numerical result matters, but it is not the only thing that should matter in this test. If you work with a respectable laboratory with sufficient technical knowledge, they will be able to report the graph (even in csv format) in such a way that it can be analyzed from the point of view of their regions.

Remember, the regions say much more than the simple numerical result. Cross-referencing this information with FTIR and DPV can yield much more insight into the condition of the lubricant. And it can help plan, in conjunction with other tests, a possible intervention on the lubricant, whether it’s a partial or complete change, or finding a solution due to problems related to the lubricant’s chemistry.

Don’t miss the opportunity to get the most out of an analysis of this caliber; it can tell you a lot about the condition of your lubricant.

When we walk into a pharmacy, there are thousands of items. Some of them do the same job but have different names and price points, while others are specialty items designed to solve a particular problem at a slightly elevated price point. Some of these may not be readily available in all pharmacies. Machinery lubricants adopt a similar type of pattern.

There are various OEMs on the market that all produce finished lubricants. Some of the majors are Shell lubricants, ExxonMobil, Total, and Castrol, while there are other niche producers who handle very specific markets. Like the pharmacy, where numerous choices solve the same issue, we have machinery lubricants from different suppliers who meet most of the standard specifications or specialty-grade products.

Each supplier will have a proprietary blend that comes from an invested amount of Research and Development into their product to produce something that meets international equipment specifications and regulatory standards.

Does this mean that one product is better than the other, or does it mean that all hydraulic oils (for instance) are the same? This depends on the application.

The hydraulic oil used to top up the compactor of a garbage truck with several leaks will not be the same hydraulic oil that we use for a critical hydraulic system in a power plant, which requires fire-resistant oil. We can also compare the engine oil used for a 40-year-old regular car to that of the engine oil used in a McLaren race car on race day.

Different applications have varying risks associated with them, as well as performance expectations; this is what sets certain lubricants apart.  

The 5S Methodology

While some may be familiar with the 5S methodology of lean principles, this may be the first time others have heard of its existence. In essence, these principles help to maintain quality standards within the workplace. As per (ASQ, 2024), 5S is a quality tool derived from 5 Japanese terms used to create a workplace suited for visual control and lean production. The 5 pillars and their translations are listed in Table 1 below.

We can use these principles to adopt a leaner approach to lubricant consolidation in our facilities. This way, we ensure that our operators have a clean, manageable workplace when handling lubricants. The 5S method can give us a better overall view of what happens in our lubricant storage areas.

Let’s “Sort’ This Out

When walking into many facilities, there are usually a lot of oil drums, buckets, or items used for lubrication scattered all over the facility. However, some facilities are fully equipped, nicely stocked, and have dedicated lube rooms. The first step in our process is determining what is needed and what is not.

In this case, the best place to start is with an inventory list developed by physically identifying the items on the plant. If this is the first time this exercise is being conducted, then it is critical to perform this check in person rather than rely on the information entered into the CMMS (if one exists). Sometimes, not all the information may have been captured in the CMMS when it was entered initially.

A good idea would be to divide the plant into various sections and perform your audit one section at a time. It would be ideal to note the following during your audit:

• Name of the lubricant (for example, Turbo S4GX)
• OEM (for example, Shell)
• Viscosity grade (ISO 46)
• Expiry date (use this opportunity to find out if you have expired lubricants in stock)
• Quantity (use this opportunity to find out if the inventory levels are accurately reflected in your CMMS).

Armed with this information, we can correlate this to the equipment needing the associated lubricant. In this instance, we can compile an asset listing and assign which lubricants are used for the respective assets. With the asset listing, we should also identify the oil requirements for the specified component. This way, we can develop a table similar to Table 2 below.

With the information collected in Table 2, we can easily sort through the lubricants we have in use and match them back to the requirements of the assets. This is where we can identify if we have duplicated products or products that serve the same function but are represented by different brands. This is the beginning of the consolidation process.

If you enter this information electronically, it will be easy to sort. You can group similar applications together and then compare the application’s requirements to the current lubricant. This will help you determine if you are using a highly specialized lubricant for an ordinary application or if the incorrect lubricant was used from inception!

This exercise will be fundamental in gauging your lubrication requirements and then allow you to consolidate some of the lubricants in use. For instance, if there are five different applications of gear oil and many types of oil, we would need to determine if all the listed lubricants are entirely necessary. See Table 3 below and determine if we need these five types of gear oil.

We can begin with the types of oils listed; some have varying viscosities, while others are food grade, and the rest are not. We can include this in a summary table, as seen in Table 4:

Table 4 shows that GB 1005, GB-4005 & GB-4008 all require the same type of oil, a food-grade ISO 220 mineral gear oil. Then why do we have three different types of oils that match the exact description? We can consolidate this oil into just one food-grade ISO 220 mineral gear oil brand. Ideally, the choice will be based on the supplier relationship, the availability of the product, and other cost factors, including delivery to the site.

We can also see that GB-2009 and GB-3003 require a non-food grade ISO 460 oil; however, one is synthetic, and the other is mineral. In this case, we can review our asset specifications and determine if a synthetic was required or if a mineral oil is preferred for these applications.

In this case, we could be using a higher-specification product and paying a lot more when the asset does not require it. This decision could have occurred in the past when synthetic oil was the only available grade of oil for that component, and it was ordered from the supplier to keep the plant running. However, if we consolidate these two, then we could go with a regular mineral non-food grade ISO 460 oil for both applications. 

By understanding our applications and where we’re using these oils, we’ve just cut down our list of 5 gear lubricants to 2 gear lubricants! These will be much easier to manage in our inventory than keeping track and ordering from 5 different suppliers.

Additionally, your staff will have less to worry about as they know which specific oil is for the ISO 220 grades and which one is for the ISO 460 grades, making it less complicated and reducing some human errors.   

The Other S Factors

The remaining 4 S factors can also be included in our journey to improve the overall quality of our approach to machinery lubrication. Once we have “Sorted” our lubricants by making sure we have what is necessary, we can move on to “Set these in order.”

In this step, we can ensure that all the types of lubricants are stored in a clean, dry, cool place away from water, direct sunlight, or drastic temperature changes. We can also observe the “FIFO” rules, where the first lubricant that enters the warehouse is also the first to leave and be used in the equipment. Additionally, we can have lists stating the assets in which the assigned oils are to be used and place matching tags on the equipment and dispensing containers to reduce mix-ups of the wrong lubricant being used.

The third “S” talks about “Shine,” which relates to keeping the work area clean. We can also apply this to our oils with the dispensing equipment, making sure we use clean, dedicated dispensing bottles, not the fancy, galvanized, open-top containers where someone showed off their welding skills. Those galvanized containers are huge sources of contamination, which will degrade our lubricants at a faster rate.  

With the fourth “S”, the process of “Standardizing” is used. This was incorporated in the first “S” during our sorting session, where we grouped similar lubricants and standardized them for various applications.

The last “S” is to “Sustain” or make the 5S process a habit. This would involve performing audits every year to ascertain if any new lubricants entered the facility and if they, in turn, should be consolidated with others that perform the same function.  

Benefits of Oil Consolidation  

There are many benefits to the consolidation of lubricants, but here are a few that stand out:

Reduced Cost of Inventory

For warehouses that stock many types of lubricants, there is a cost attached to holding these high stock levels, especially when the lubricants will not be consumed as quickly. However, with a consolidated stock, these levels can deplete at a faster rate than the specialty one or two lubricants, which may be used occasionally by certain assets. This helps to reduce the overall holding cost of the stock.

Reduced Human Error

With lubricants from many different suppliers, it is very easy for someone to get confused and use the wrong lubricant in the wrong application. This can lead to unplanned downtime and a possible flush of the entire system, depending on the level of cross-contamination. However, with a consolidated stock, the risks associated with humans utilizing the wrong lubricant become minimized. 

Reduced HSE Risks

When removing a drum of oil from storage, a forklift may be required (depending on the location). If there were different products from various suppliers, it may be difficult to access the ones needed or may require extra work to remove the additional drums from the other suppliers before the operators gain access to the lubricant they need. With a consolidated stock, it would be easier to access the lubricant needed, and there would be less risk associated with removing it from stock.

There are various types of handling procedures associated with the different lubricants. As such, more procedures will be involved for disposing and handling various oils. This can also increase the HSE risk if someone is not fully aware of how to handle specific lubricants. With a consolidated stock, the HSE personnel will not have as many procedures to be aware of when handling these lubricants.

Reduced Operational Costs

Personnel would no longer be required to handle all the invoicing and payments of several lubricant suppliers for the various brands. This will reduce the hours the accounting department spends on the necessary paperwork and bank transactions for several vendors. Additionally, warehouse personnel will not be tasked with receiving products several times a day from the various suppliers and producing the accompanying paperwork. This can reduce the overall operational costs.

There are many benefits to the consolidation of lubricants, especially in our facilities, but it begins with understanding if we are using them in the correct application or if we’re using an over-specified lubricant in a lower-tiered application. Auditing your facility will assist in making this process easier, as noted above. We all have our role to play in consolidating lubricants to ensure that we have a safer, more efficient plant.   

References

ASQ. (2024, OCtober 19). What are the Five S’s (5S) of Lean. Retrieved from American Society for Quality: https://asq.org/quality-resources/lean/five-s-tutorial

In 1966, at the height of the “swinging sixties” movement, the world of lubrication, friction, and wear finally received worldwide recognition as a scientific entity responsible for continued machine health and asset longevity.

In retrospect, such recognition was long overdue, considering the practice of applying lubricants to moving surfaces to reduce friction and surface wear is now recognized to be over 5,000 years old.

This fact was substantiated by the discovery of some archaeological evidence in the East Asia Tigres-Euphrates river system, i.e., wooden cart wheels and wheel-bearing material thought to have been lubricated with water, tallow, or beeswax (Jenkins, 1980).

I discussed that finding with a colleague, which eventually led to an exercise that came up with a “Top 10” list of pioneers in the lubrication field.

Most people would consider this a challenge, but many true pioneers are worthy of mention in the fields of lubrication, friction, and wear. The following list reflects my ten personal, gold-medal “Lubrication Hero” choices, in chronological order, starting back in the 1600s.

1. Sir Isaac Newton

Newton was an English Physicist, mathematician, and scientist who lived from 1643 to 1727. Famous for describing gravity and the three laws of motion, he was the first to recognize surface friction as an external force.

2. Elijah McCoy

The Canadian-born McCoy worked as an oiler for the Michigan Central Railroad when he invented the world’s first patented, self-pressurized oiling device. It used steam from a locomotive engine to force-feed lubricant to various points automatically. The design worked so well that railroads shunned all competitive products and only wanted to purchase McCoy’s lubricator. This, in turn, led to the coining of the phrase, “It’s the real McCoy!”

3. Richard Stribeck

Stribeck was a German engineer who 1902 first described changes in the friction coefficient of bearings as they experienced different lubricant regimes (Boundary, Mixed film, and Hydrodynamic) from startup to full running. He graphically represented these changes in what is now known as the “Stribeck Curve” diagram.

4. Arthur Gulborg

Driven by the repetitive task of manually refilling oil cups of the die-cast machines in his family’s business, Gulborg was motivated to develop a less taxing process that employed a new grease-lubricant medium. The result was the world’s first grease gun, which featured a screw-type design built to mate up to a proprietary bearing point fitting. Gulborg called his invention the “Alemite” high-pressure lubricating system, after his family business.

5. John R. Battle

Battle was a U.S.-born engineer who, in 1916, penned The Lubrication Engineers Handbook. Four years later, he published the encyclopedic Handbook of Industrial Oil Engineering.

A prolific inventor of all things lubrication, his “Gun-Fil” system is still sold today. The International Council of Machinery Lubrication (ICML) presents an annual award in Battle’s honor that recognizes best-practice machinery lubrication programs.

6. Joseph Bijur

Until 1923, automobiles required a rigorous daily lubrication schedule to lubricate up to 50 chassis lubrication points.

To alleviate this burden, the American inventor Bijur developed a self-contained engineered pump and the world’s first centralized lubrication-delivery system for oil, which he called a “single line resistance (SLR)” system. His namesake company still exists today, and the SLR system remains the most copied and highest-selling lubrication system ever.

7. Oscar V. Zerk

Zerk emigrated from Austria to the United States and became a prolific inventor (with over 300 inventions to his credit).

His most famous contribution to the world of lubrication manifested itself as the now-famous, patented “Zerk” push-style grease fitting that has been unchanged since 1929. By the time he died in 1968, more than 20 billion zerk grease fittings had been manufactured.

8. August H. Gill

A U.S.-born chemistry graduate of MIT in 1884 (at the tender age of 20), Gill made his mark as a founding member of the ASTM committee for petroleum products and lubricants.

More importantly, he’s credited as the founding father of oil analysis (having been one of the first to formalize it as a field of study). The ICML presents an award in Gill’s honor to recognize organizations that exhibit excellence in applying used oil analysis and lubricant-condition monitoring.

9. Sir Peter Jost

Funded by the British Ministry of State for Education and Science, Jost was tasked to investigate the position of lubrication education and research in the United Kingdom and give an opinion on industry needs in this field.

This assignment led to a landmark study of the measured effects of friction, lubrication, and wear on the British economy. Jost coined the term “Tribology” and introduced it to the scientific and industrial world. For this contribution, he received a knighthood.

The resulting Jost report was then used as a model for further studies in the U.S., Canada, and Germany. All of them echoed similar results that highlighted the importance and effectiveness of lubrication.

10. Ernest Rabinowicz

As a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at MIT, Rabinowicz followed up on Sir Richard Jost’s study with his ground-breaking study on “Design, Friction, and Wear of Interacting Bearing Surfaces.”

This study led to Rabinowicz’s seminal tribology book, Friction and Wear of Materials. He is also credited as the author of the “Rabinowicz Law,” which states: “Every year 6% of the GDP—Gross Domestic Product—is lost through mechanical wear.”

We must understand who from the past (and how the past) helped shape our modern-day approach toward lubrication practice and management. I have admired the above lineup for many years and believe that all those listed are worthy of note in the tribology field.

Initially published in The RAM Review