used oil analysis Archives - Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd

From Measurement to Action

Start measuring the air in your system. The most useful air-in-oil measurement is not the one that produces the largest number of parameters. It is the one that supports a better engineering process.

Define a representative baseline.
Detect a meaningful deviation.
Interpret it together with fluid, component, and operating context.
Investigate the most plausible mechanism.
Verify whether the intervention changed the measured behavior.

Many practitioners only view air as an issue when they see foam. By this time, it is too late and damage has already occurred to the system. Even small bubbles can have system consequences, as shown in the diagram below.

Figure 6: System-level consequences which can be detected by the presence of small bubbles through deepfluid’s technology

Many operators are not aware of the impacts of air-in-oil and quite often, it is labelled as something else. However, it usually shows up as a foam problem, unexpected NVH, control instability, temperature problem, cavitation problem, pump problem or an oil problem. The key is to monitor these effects in different settings.

Starting with studying air release, dispersion and formulation effects under controlled conditions in the lab. Moving to the testing phase where bubble behaviour is related to operating conditions, design changes and system response. Then finally to the field where changes can be tracked over time to support root-cause analysis and confirm any improvements.

This is the benefit of using the deepfluid technology as it can capture data from the various phases to bring about actionable insights to improve the reliability of operating systems.

Find out more in the full article, "From Lab Insight to Field Action: How Air-in-Oil Diagnostics can support better Troubleshooting" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd, David Placzek, Dr. Lukas Hafner

Oil Properties / Reliability / Used Oil Analysis

The 360 Approach – One Shared Data Language Across the Lubrication Value Chain

At Deepfluid, they have adopted a 360 approach where they can assist all the stakeholders involved in the lubricant industry as it relates to the oil being in the equipment. It connects formulation development, laboratory testing, component testing, system validation, field operation, maintenance, troubleshooting, and verification of corrective actions.

With the 360 approach, various stakeholders can be involved to ensure that the lubricant is fully assessed in different situations, from the testing and development of the lubricant to its actual application in the component then finally to the end user by ensuring they get the results they need.

The 360 Approach – One Shared Data Language Across the Lubrication Value Chain

An additive supplier may investigate formulation effects. A lubricant manufacturer may compare air-release and foam behavior. A filter or seal supplier may study aeration or air ingress. An OEM may correlate bubble behavior with efficiency, thermal management, or NVH. An operator may investigate an abnormal field deviation. An external oil laboratory or research institution may provide controlled reference analysis.

The questions differ, but the underlying air-in-oil metrics can remain comparable.

Not one product for every stakeholder, but one measurement logic that allows different stakeholders to work on the same fluid-system question from different positions in the value chain.

The 360 approach ensures that all aspects are taken into consideration for the oil, from the lab testing to the field development, with all the stakeholders involved. This guarantees that the final product is reliable and the user should have a valuable experience.

Find out more in the full article, "From Lab Insight to Field Action: How Air-in-Oil Diagnostics can support better Troubleshooting" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd, David Placzek, Dr. Lukas Hafner

Oil Properties / Reliability / Used Oil Analysis

Case Study – From Abnormal Air-in-Oil Data to a Targeted Seal Investigation

Deepfluid’s direct measurement system can be used not only to analyze the interaction between oil and air during operation but also to monitor the overall system behavior and the reliability of the installed components.

The leak-tightness of hydraulic circuits is essential and critical for the safe operation of these systems. Leaks can allow air and particles to be drawn into the system under negative pressure and oil to be forced out of the system under positive pressure. The presence of air significantly alters operating behavior by changing viscosity, density, fluid level, and lubricating film thickness. These factors can lead to damage such as pitting, scuffing, and micro-dieseling.

Case Study – From Abnormal Air-in-Oil Data to a Targeted Seal Investigation

If an operator or service technician frequently inspects an application’s oil tank—either directly or through large sight glasses—high air content can be detected by significant cloudiness in the oil.

However, if the application’s oil tank is located in a hard-to-reach position, operates autonomously, or is only accessed during shutdown, such extreme conditions are detected very late, in the laboratory—if at all—before costly damage occurs. This is the case with the operation of wind turbines. Although speed, torque, temperature, particle content, and potential oil leaks are detected, suction-side air ingress, for example, cannot be detected.

figure 5A — Figure 5A. Recurring Air-in-Oil Deviation During Gearbox Operation. A synchronized view of air content, pressure context, and bubble population illustrates how recurring events can support a targeted investigation of possible suction-side or sealing-related air ingress.

In the case study presented, a defective shaft seal was detected through direct measurement on a supply pump for the injection lubrication system of a wind turbine, based on an iteratively and periodically occurring very high air content and loud noise. A minor issue that can have serious financial consequences.

Risks posed by excessive air content and their costs, using a 2.5 MW turbine as an example:

Higher operating temperature, which requires additional cooling
Increased cooling capacity (between 4.9 kW and 9.4 kW) due to reduced thermal conductivity (0.14 W/(mK) → 0.125 W/(mK)), costing between 7k€ and 10k€ per year
Change in friction conditions in conjunction with increased cooling capacity: 43k€–82k€ per year
Risk of faster oil aging due to accelerated oil oxidation and thermal oil oxidation: 1 additional oil change (24k€–60k€)
Total mechanical failure of the main gearbox renders the entire system uneconomical.

In this component, there was persistently high air content which we are able to identify and link to abnormal ingress of air into the lubrication system. However, we also saw the pressure drop during pump operation. This was an indicator for suction-side or sealing-related air ingress. We also noticed a dense bubble population which indicates critical oil-air dispersion under operating conditions. There was a deviation from a similar gearbox indicating that this was a system-specific malfunction rather than normal behaviour.

If these were not identified at this early stage, the equipment would run the risk of micro-dieseling, cavitation, oxidation and temperature increase. This would lead to mechanical damage in the gearbox or oil supply components, eventually leading to reduced lubrication reliability and accelerated wear.

Find out more in the full article, "From Lab Insight to Field Action: How Air-in-Oil Diagnostics can support better Troubleshooting" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd, David Placzek, Dr. Lukas Hafner

Oil Properties / Reliability / Used Oil Analysis

One Portfolio for Controlled and Dynamic Evidence

The Deepfluid portfolio applies this methodology through three connected solutions.

The Air-in-One Lab Analyzer establishes controlled references.

The Optical Inline Sensor captures dynamic behavior.

visiQ connects both into a comparable engineering process.

One Portfolio for Controlled and Dynamic Evidence

Figure 4. One Measurement Logic from Lab to Field. From Lab to Field does not mean that laboratory, test-rig, and operating conditions are identical. It means that the same Air Intake, Retention, and Release logic—and the same bubble-level metrics—can be applied across different environments and compared within one engineering workflow.

Deepfluid Air-in-One Lab Analyzer

The Deepfluid Air-in-One Lab Analyzer combines air release, foam, and time-resolved bubble behavior within one integrated and automated workflow.

Defined aeration, fluid handling, automated temperature conditioning, optical measurement, foam observation, data transfer, and cleaning can be connected into repeatable test sequences. A fully automated AIR test can capture the complete progression from baseline through Air Intake and Retention to Air Release.

Throughout this sequence, the system measures the physical development of the oil-air dispersion rather than only recording a final release time or foam volume, including Air Content, Bubble Size and Bubble Size Distribution, Bubble Count and Bubble Population, Oil-Air Interfacial Area, and time-resolved Intake, Retention, and Release behavior.

The Air-in-One Lab Analyzer also supports automated test campaigns. Lubricant and additive developers can compare fluid candidates, formulation variants, additive packages, antifoam concentrations, temperature profiles, or aeration durations using the same test logic and evaluation structure.

This makes it possible to investigate not only whether a fluid meets a defined air-release or foam specification, but also why different formulations produce different Air Intake, Retention, Release, and foam responses. Engineers can examine how the bubble population develops before visible foam forms, how much air remains dispersed after aeration stops, and how temperature or formulation changes influence the subsequent recovery.

The approach is not intended to replace standardized ISO or ASTM air-release or foam tests. These methods remain essential for reproducible specification checks and lubricant qualification. The Air-in-One Lab Analyzer adds a complementary, process-aligned R&D perspective that goes beyond a single pass/fail value.

It enables lubricant developers, test engineers, and technical decision-makers to investigate the mechanisms behind Air-in-Oil behavior, compare formulations under application-related conditions, and develop a more complete understanding of Air-in-Oil Contamination before it becomes a field troubleshooting issue.

Standardized tests confirm whether a requirement is met. The AIR workflow helps engineers understand how the result develops—and how that behavior translates from Lab to Field. It is not a replacement for the standardized tests but rather a tool to understand Air-in-Oil Contamination from an R&D perspective.

Deepfluid Optical Inline Sensor

The Deepfluid Optical Inline Sensor transfers the AIR Framework into dynamic test and operating environments.

Instead of recording only a single air-content value, it can capture complete Intake, Retention, and Release behavior over defined time windows. Engineers can observe when a bubble population begins to form, how rapidly it develops, which size classes dominate, how much air remains dispersed after the operating state changes, and how quickly the system returns toward its baseline.

This adds a time-resolved view of transient events. A load change, speed ramp, thermal transition, pressure drop, component-switching event, or start-stop cycle can be evaluated as a complete AIR sequence rather than as an isolated data point.

The sensor can be used in representative inline or bypass configurations, subject to application-specific review. All device configurations have also been developed for demanding high-pressure applications above 150 bar.

When bubble-level data are combined with temperature, pressure, speed, load, flow, efficiency, vibration, or noise, the measurement supports direct comparison between fluids, components, machine variants, and operating conditions. It can also be used to verify whether a design change or corrective action altered the measured Air Intake, Retention, or Release behavior.

The sensor does not automatically diagnose a root cause. It records how the dispersed air phase responds to a defined event, operating state, or intervention and provides evidence for a more focused engineering assessment.

visiQ by Deepfluid

visiQ by Deepfluid provides the common comparison and reporting layer.

Devices and measurement sessions can be assigned to projects, enabling structured data management across development programs, test campaigns, and field investigations. Evidence Snapshots remain linked to the corresponding measurement points and operating context.

The platform supports machine-to-machine, system-to-system, component-to-component, fluid and formulation, and before-and-after comparisons.

For example, the same machine and lubricant can be evaluated under different ambient conditions or load cycles. Conversely, different components can be compared under the same operating profile, or similar machines can be benchmarked across locations. This helps engineering teams distinguish more systematically between fluid-related, component-related, system-related, and environment-related differences.

visiQ also supports automated reporting, reducing the effort required to compile recurring test results, before-and-after comparisons, and structured project summaries.

Find out more in the full article, "From Lab Insight to Field Action: How Air-in-Oil Diagnostics can support better Troubleshooting" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd, David Placzek, Dr. Lukas Hafner

Oil Properties / Reliability / Used Oil Analysis

One Shared Data Language – From Lab to Field

Particularly for OEMs, it is important to be able to transition the product from the lab to the testing phase, then into the field. In the lab, they can control the operating conditions, study the air intake and release, dispersion and formulation effects. Afterwards, they can relate bubble behaviour to operating conditions, design changes and system response. Finally, they can execute in the field and track the changes over time to support any root cause analysis for the future and confirm improvements. This is a movement from controlled conditions in the lab to dynamic conditions in testing to finally real-world conditions in the field.

Typically, conventional sensors will give parameters such as a change in dielectricity, a foam tendency, some noise or vibration and an oil condition change just as a result, without knowing the root cause. However, with Deepfluid, they are able to actually make physical behaviour visible and directly explainable. The size and shape of a bubble can be seen, classified and quantified. This allows for the actual oil-air contact surface area to be determined, and this can be trended over time to establish patterns.

One Shared Data Language – From Lab to Field

What Recurring Patterns Can Bubble-Level Data Reveal?

Direct optical measurement does not identify a root cause on its own. Its practical value lies in revealing repeatable physical patterns that can be compared with operating conditions, representative baselines, and similar systems.

Examples include:

An increasing population of small bubbles under steady load may be consistent with continuous air ingress or churning.
Recurring air-content spikes synchronized with pump starts, pressure drops, or speed changes may point to an event-related source of Air Intake.
A shift toward larger bubbles following a load or pressure transition may reflect bubble expansion, coalescence, or the beginning of Air Release.
A slow return to baseline after an operating event indicates that air remains retained in the fluid-system combination or is released only gradually.
Similar Air Content with different bubble-size distributions, bubble counts, or oil-air interfacial areas shows that the physical state of the dispersion is not necessarily the same.
Different AIR profiles under comparable operating conditions can help distinguish normal system behavior from a machine-, component-, or environment-specific deviation.

Before-and-after measurements add another practical dimension. By repeating the same operating cycle after a change to a seal, reservoir, component, fluid, or control strategy, engineers can verify whether the intervention altered Air Intake, Retention, or Release behavior.

These observations should be treated as investigation signals rather than automatic diagnoses. Their meaning becomes clearer when bubble-level evidence is evaluated together with pressure, temperature, load, speed, flow, vibration, noise, and a representative baseline.

Find out more in the full article, "From Lab Insight to Field Action: How Air-in-Oil Diagnostics can support better Troubleshooting" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd, David Placzek, Dr. Lukas Hafner

Oil Properties / Reliability / Used Oil Analysis

AIR as a Practical Lab-to-Field Framework

The Deepfluid AIR Framework turns insights from bubble-level evidence into three entirely new practical engineering questions and metrics:

1 Air Intake

Air Intake describes not only how quickly air enters the fluid system and under what conditions it is generated or introduced, but also how much air the oil can actually absorb over a specific period of time.

2 Air Retention

Air Retention describes how much air remains dispersed, how long it remains in the system, and how the bubble population changes.

3 Air Release

Air Release describes how quickly and completely the fluid-system combination returns toward its baseline after aeration or an operating-state change. By having the Air Intake value, Deepfluid addresses a new question that has not yet been covered by conventional air release laboratory tests: “At what initial air content by volume does my air-release measurement actually begin?”

AIR as a Practical Lab-to-Field Framework

AIR is not an abstract research model. It is a practical structure for planning tests, defining measurement windows, comparing fluids, evaluating component and design variants, analyzing operating states, and verifying corrective actions.

Figure 3. The AIR Framework: Intake, Retention, and Release. The AIR Framework structures air-in-oil behavior as a time-resolved sequence. In controlled testing, aeration duration, temperature conditioning, measurement intervals, and recovery phases can be defined; the same logic can be applied to operating events in testing and field environments.

In the laboratory, air release no longer has to be viewed only as a single endpoint under one fixed condition. Individually defined aeration durations, automated temperature conditioning, and time-resolved optical measurement make it possible to run a fully automated AIR test.

Such a sequence can establish a bubble-level baseline before aeration, follow the bubble population during a defined Air Intake phase, quantify Air Retention after the air supply stops, and measure the Air Release curve over time. The same workflow can connect air content, bubble-size distribution, and bubble-population dynamics with subsequent foam formation and foam decay.

This makes it possible to compare different fluids, additive concentrations, temperatures, or aeration durations within structured, automated test campaigns. The laboratory therefore moves closer to application-related questions without giving up controlled and repeatable conditions.

In testing and field operation, the same AIR logic can be applied to defined operating windows. A cycle may begin at a stable baseline, follow an increase in air content during a load, speed, pressure, or temperature change, quantify how much air remains dispersed, and measure recovery afterward.

The resulting bubble-level metrics can be related to operating data such as temperature, pressure, speed, load, flow, efficiency, vibration, or noise.

The conditions are not identical across lab, testing, and field environments but the measurement logic is.

AIR turns air release from a single laboratory result into a practical understanding of the full cycle around how air enters, remains, and leaves a fluid system.

Find out more in the full article, "From Lab Insight to Field Action: How Air-in-Oil Diagnostics can support better Troubleshooting" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd, David Placzek, Dr. Lukas Hafner

Oil Properties / Reliability / Used Oil Analysis

How Air in Oil gets Measured

Typically, oil condition monitoring is performed through standardized laboratory tests at specified intervals. A representative sample is taken on-site from the system being monitored and analyzed in the laboratory under controlled conditions. This allows for a detailed analysis of numerous parameters that reflect the condition of the oil, such as viscosity, density, and air release behaviour in accordance with DIN ISO 9120.

However, when the sample is pulled from the equipment, it must travel some distance to the lab. During this transit, the oil sample may lose some characteristics that defined the system in which it was operating. While this does not corrode the integrity of the sample, it may not define an accurate representation of system conditions.

In the laboratory, it is not possible to correlate the oil’s interaction with the system’s behavior, which is characterized by constantly changing process conditions such as pressure, temperature, flow rates and air-contents. As these process conditions change, the measurable properties of the oil also change proportionally, and these properties directly determine the efficiency and service life of both the system and the oil. Comprehensive monitoring of the system’s condition can therefore only be achieved through laboratory analysis in conjunction with field measurements.

This approach allows for direct measurement of how the oil interacts with the equipment and generates data points that were previously unthinkable. This enables operators to make predictions that can extend the service life of the oils and make plant operations more efficient or less prone to errors.

What Gets Measured

It is well known that, during the operation of hydraulic systems and transmissions, air is inevitably though unintentionally mixed into the oil. The air content alters the oil’s properties by creating a multiphase mixture, thereby influencing measurable operating parameters in both the short term (efficiency, NVH, temperature) and the long term (oxidation, additive depletion, oil aging).

The Deepfluid bubble profiling technology combines an intelligent vision module and an intelligent LED system. This captures real-time images of the fluid as it flows through the device. Through the use of computer vision-based image processing, each air bubble is identified, sized and classified on a continuous basis. This allows trends and patterns to be recognized and established. No on-line calibration and constant re-calibration is required for this equipment, and it can work across various types of oils with different viscosity ranges and colors or aging-states.

The Deepfluid optical approach evaluates bubbles within a defined size range of 8 to 500 micrometers and generates time-resolved information such as:

air content,
bubble-size distribution,
bubble count,
bubble-population dynamics,
oil-air contact surface / interfacial area, and
transient air events.

Figure 1. Same Air Content. Different Bubble Behavior. Two fluid states can show the same volumetric air content while differing in bubble-size distribution, bubble count, oil-air interfacial area, and release tendency. Air content alone does not fully describe an oil-air dispersion.

Until now, measuring air content has been possible primarily through indirect analytical methods. In this approach, the conductivity of the oil, excluding air content, was referenced to the conductivity of the oil-air mixture during operation. This allows for the analysis of air content percentages under constant conditions. The biggest problem with this measurement is the change in the oil during continuous operation of the system, since water content, particle content, temperature, and additive content are constantly changing, making continuous measurement during operation impossible.

As shown above in Figure 1, the traditional method of measuring the air volume does not accurately depict what is happening in the oil. The air volume of 0.65% only measures one aspect of the oil. With the direct measurement by Deepfluid, users can get deeper insights and explore another dimension of oil condition monitoring by measuring the bubble diameters during operation and compare it with the same technology in a lab-based air-in-oil analysis. Based on this information, short term behaviour (density change, viscosity change, lubricant film thickness, Air-Intake, Air-Release-Behaviour, thermal conductivity and NVH) as well as long term response (oxidation, additive depletion, mechanical robustness, risk of pitting) can be detected and their respective influence targeted.

A key feature is the availability of so-called Evidence Snapshots. Each calculated measurement point can be linked to an optical image of the fluid at that moment. Engineers can review the underlying image, verify the detected bubble population, and relate an unusual value to the physical condition on which it is based.

This creates point-level traceability between the calculated metric and the visible evidence.

Evidence Snapshots do not replace numerical specifications for repeatability, accuracy, or measurement uncertainty. They add transparent verification and support more informed technical discussion between lubricant developers, test engineers, component specialists, and reliability teams.

Figure 2. From Optical Evidence to Quantitative Bubble-Level Data. Direct optical measurement links calculated air-in-oil metrics to the underlying fluid image. Evidence Snapshots provide point-level traceability between air content, bubble-population data, and the recorded physical condition.

The optical approach has also been demonstrated with visually challenging fluids, including dark, aged, and soot-loaded engine oil. As with any optical method, application limits must be understood. However, Deepfluid’s bubble-level analysis is not restricted to transparent new oils.

The objective is not to replace conventional oil analysis, pressure, temperature, vibration, or standardized air-release and foam testing. It is to add direct evidence about the dispersed air phase and its dynamics.

Find out more in the full article, "From Lab Insight to Field Action: How Air-in-Oil Diagnostics can support better Troubleshooting" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd, David Placzek, Dr. Lukas Hafner

Reliability / Storage & Handling of Lubricants

The Ideal Lube Room

While many may think it is costly or impossible to transform their current lube room, there are a few low-cost adjustments which can be made to help reduce the initiation of failure in this area.

As shown in Figure 2, these small changes can have big impacts on reducing the contaminants which get into the oils before they are added to the machines.

ideal-lube-room — Figure 2: Strategies for an Ideal Lube Room.

By implementing some of the aforementioned strategies, we can see an immediate reduction in the number of failures which occur at a facility. While many think about investing in predictive technologies which may range to the higher cost bracket, these simple adjustments to the lube room can easily solve a large percentage of the issues.

If we were to think about this in terms of the cost of the failures for gearboxes or other critical pieces of equipment, the investment in these strategies to upgrade your lube room is minimal. When investigating your next failure, perform a full root cause analysis and determine whether it’s stemming from your lube room. Chances are that you have the opportunity to prevent a lot more failures than you would expect.

Find out more in the full article, "Why Asset Failures Often Start in the Lube Room" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd

Reliability / Storage & Handling of Lubricants

Mislabeling and Environmental Conditions in the Lube Room

Thus far, we’ve spoken about the effects of mainly physical contamination but quite a number of things also happen in the lube room. One major aspect of compromise is proper labelling of the lubricants. Many times, technicians are in a rush to get their lube route underway and will often not double check that they have the correct lubricant for the application that they are working on. In these cases, they may have picked up the wrong lubricant which is not the appropriate viscosity or suited for the application either!

This can lead to incompatible lubricants being mixed causing a series of failures. It can also lead to incorrect viscosity being applied to the equipment causing wear and tear or efficiency losses. Additionally, if the wrong type of oil is used, this can also lead to severe bleaching of the additives out of the oil.

Mislabeling and Environmental Conditions in the Lube Room

For instance, if a motor oil (which contains 30% additives) was placed in a hydraulic oil sump, this can lead to catastrophic events where the additives in the motor oil may trap water getting into the hydraulic oil making it emulsify rather than allowing the water to drop out.

As such, we need to ensure that there are adequate labeling systems in place to minimize the occurrence of a mix up with the lubricants. Colour coding can also help as this reduces the errors of “picking up” the wrong dispensing container especially when our technicians are in a hurry.

The environment has a huge role to play regarding the integrity of lubricants. If lubricants are stored outside in drums, they have the tendency to collect rainwater. They can breathe and draw in this rainwater which gets collected at the top of the drum. This breathing action occurs due to changes in temperature such as the change from a bright sunny environment to a rainstorm. This introduces water into the oil and contaminates it before it reaches the equipment. Lubricants should be stored at controlled temperatures between 0–25°C and in a sheltered area.

Find out more in the full article, "Why Asset Failures Often Start in the Lube Room" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd

Reliability / Storage & Handling of Lubricants

Addressing Contamination in the Lube Room

When we think about the lube room, there can be a few images which come to mind. Either a pristine environment, with everything colour coded, neatly packed on the assigned shelves, dedicated storage and handling containers and a temperature-controlled environment (everyone’s dream!).

Or we can have a mix of dirty, oily rags, creatively designed dispensing containers where the welders were definitely showing off their skills and mislabeled (or no labels) on the lubricants. We can also have many images in between since there is a range of things which can be done (or not done) by those in charge of the lube rooms given their environmental conditions and constraints (budgetary or operational).

Unfortunately, the lube room is the place where many failures can begin if the conditions are not appropriate. It should ideally be the first line of defense for our assets but is often overlooked. Typically, this is the starting point of the journey for any lubricant and if it carries contaminants then we are exponentially decreasing the life of our lubricated assets before they have a chance to operate in our facility. This article explores the ways in which we can reduce these effects and some areas of improvement for any lube room.

Addressing Contamination

The ISO 4406 test is one that the industry is very familiar with as it governs the cleanliness of the oil. Typically, every system / OEM has a targeted cleanliness level. But how does the cleanliness level actually impact the lubricant and its functions? It is often said that the industry runs on a film of oil that is between 1–10 microns. Essentially, that means that any particle which is larger than this range interrupts the film and can cause damage and wear to the components.

For those not familiar with ISO 4406, this quantifies the number of particles into three categories, ≥4μm / ≥6μm / ≥14μm particles per milliliter of fluid. Each category measures the quantity of particles that fit the size bracket and then these are translated to a scaled number. As such, the numbers represented are not the actual quantity of the particles of that size.

Therefore, an ISO code of 20/15/13 represents:

20	between 5,000 – 10,000 particles larger than 4μm in one milliliter of fluid
15	between 160 – 320 particles larger than 6μm in one milliliter of fluid
13	between 40 – 80 particles larger than 14μm in one milliliter of fluid

New oil delivery in container sizes between a pail or a truck load, the cleanliness value can be excellent. Sometimes these values can be as clean as ISO 16/14/11, but can also be quite poor. A 16/14/11 score is great, but perhaps our turbines or hydraulic systems particularly those with EHC systems require something more stringent (due to their tighter clearances) such as ISO 14/12/9. The table below shows a comparison of what that actually means as it relates to the number of particles in the oil for these ratings.

As we see in Table 2, there is a major difference between the number of particles at the 4 micron level between what is being delivered to the facility as new oil versus what the turbine actually requires. When we translate that to the fact that bearings in turbines may run on a film of oil which is between 1–10 microns, and our new oil has potentially 640 particles that are bigger than 4 microns, then we can conceptualize that the oil film will most definitely be disrupted!

This ISO cleanliness level starts off from the entry of the “clean” lubricant into the plant. If we factor in drums which have been exposed to the atmosphere, dirty transfer containers which already contain contaminants or bad practices (leaving hoses open to the atmosphere), then the ISO contaminant ratings will significantly increase. This means we are literally pouring contaminants into our oils and our assets.

Thus far, we have only described the contaminants in the form of solid particles, but contaminants can also exist in the liquid form (fuel, water, other lubricants, process liquids) or gaseous form (air, process gases). These can all affect the lubricant either acting as catalysts or fouling the system.

The Unseen Failure Chain

When we think about starting from the lube room and tracing the chain of events which leads to failure, it will look similar to Figure 1 below.

In this case, contaminants start off in the lube room, and they enter the equipment, wreak havoc and then lead to failure. During many failure investigations, the analyst stops at the physical root causes and can easily blame the component. Since they did not investigate further, they missed that the source of contamination actually came from the lube room and possibly bad storage and handling practices.

Find out more in the full article, "Why Asset Failures Often Start in the Lube Room" featured in Precision Lubrication Magazine by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd

Tagged: used oil analysis

Deepfluid Air-in-One Lab Analyzer

Deepfluid Optical Inline Sensor

visiQ by Deepfluid

What Recurring Patterns Can Bubble-Level Data Reveal?

What Gets Measured

Addressing Contamination

The Unseen Failure Chain