Noise: LLOYD Factor (Leaks and Losses Obscure Your Data) and human error

Sources of noise

In this guide, waste is referred to as noise. It exists and it distracts you. The sources of most noise inside a manufacturing facility are described as the LLOYD (leaks and losses obscure your data) Factor and human error, including:

• leaks
• losses
• unplanned downtime
• excessive maintenance
• inventory losses
• waste handling and disposal
• slow cash-to-cash cycles
• excessive labour touchpoints
• deadstock
• higher than planned utility use and sewage surcharges

Noise can also change across a process. It can be described as local or continuous. Local noise is a variable found within any stage of the input-process-output sequence. Continuous noise is noise that is carried across all three stages.

Leaks and losses at the input stage are local variables, specific to that stage. However, that same noise can increase if its effect crosses the process and output stages. Where local noise is not controlled, it can become continuous and louder (have a bigger cost effect) at the end of line or output stage.

The manufacturing sequence

The sequence in manufacturing is:

• input
• process
• output

This sequence reduces noise. Input variables are controlled possible variables in the process and output stages successively decline. The benefit to following this sequence and the actions suggested in the Appendices is that both production efficiency and environmental efficiency move in the same positive direction. This sequence is the same no matter the scale of a business. Sometimes the scale or size of a business limits some actions. The starting point (what the guide calls foundational BMPs and technologies) is the same.

The LLOYD factor

The LLOYD factor can be broken down into three areas. They are:

• physical leaks within water, steam, air exchange, compressed air handling systems and mechanical wear which increases utility use
• efficiency loss due to correctable system designs
• power quality (PQ), which affects motor performance and data integrity

The payback on fixing leaks is immediate. New leaks emerge constantly since equipment degrades with age. Audits are only reliable on the day they were done. Estimates based upon equipment manufacturers’ specifications ignore leaks and losses. The solution for leak management involves:

• equipping maintenance with the skills and tools to detect leaks (measuring when and where leaks occur is half of the solution)
• ensuring both maintenance and production management monitor sub-metered equipment performance
• encouraging staff to report leaks
• instituting a monthly leak review to ensure leaks are fixed as they are identified or occur

Losses happen because of poor input system design for fluids (water, steam and air). The efficient movement of fluids and electricity reduces those costs. These systems combine motors and pipes or ducting. Turbulence, velocity and friction are all factors that can contribute to noise in fluid delivery systems.

Detecting and correcting losses involves:

• mapping the equipment in your facility. Heating, ventilation, air conditioning, motors, conveyors and pumps all need to be understood based on their input loads, energy demand, flow and output
• visually inspecting and measuring systems for actual outputs compared to their manufacturing specification sheets
• correcting deficiencies

Ducts and pipes

Ducts and pipes can be a major source of loss and inspecting them (to identify legacy design flaw, for example) is a logical first step in your strategy to deal with noise.

Ducts move air. Their purpose is air exchange plus heating and cooling. The efficiency of a duct is measured at outlets (diffusers) where flow is metered. The problem is that ducts leak, and those leaks affect the efficiency or rate of flow at the measuring point by an average of 10–25%. Aerosolized duct sealing decreases the energy consumption of air handling equipment by 8–10%. A second step is to use fresh air handling systems as an air sanitization system with hyperoxide ions. This technology is proven to neutralize viruses (including COVID-19), moulds and bacteria as well as provide a 3-ft sneeze shield for workers.

Pipes and ducts with sharp changes in direction such as a hard 90° angle create turbulence at their inlet or outlet that reduces effective flow as much as 50%. Replace hard-angled T-intersections and hard right-angled ducting with rounded inlets and outlets. Turbulence makes a motor work harder for less usable output. This kind of design flaw also increases motor wear. The loss of an exhaust fan or water pump because of a power surge will stop production. Your facility map plus performance metering will identify this risk. A low-cost alternative to sub-metering all types of motors is to use a portable data logger to check these motors on a monthly or quarterly basis so that preventative maintenance avoids this risk.

Air handling ductwork is another source of leaks. The rate of fresh air supply is measured at the end of a duct, at the diffuser. Leaks in ducts have been shown to reduce this flow by 20–70%, which means air supply systems must work harder to achieve the proper diffuser rate. Aerosolized duct sealing corrects those leaks.

Airborne contagions

The spread of airborne viruses and bacteria such as the common cold and influenza is a problem when staff infect each other in the office and on the production floor. Worker absence due to illness affects productivity. A safe work environment is also linked to labour attraction and retention. Active air purification systems mounted in-duct (after those ducts have been sealed) can provide a verified 99% reduction in airborne COVID-19, virus and bacterial loads; and a 98% reduction in airborne moulds. The REME-LED technology is used in hospital operating rooms and as a direct contact food safety treatment. Since 2020, this technology has seen use in commercial applications as an alternative to fogging enclosed spaces with an identical result. Find more information on this technology.

Disclaimer: This is not a product endorsement. It is, however, the only current and available technology. REME-LED disperses ionized hydrogen peroxide and does not emit ozone. It is an alternative to fogging cannot be done while office and production space is occupied.

Motors and pumps

Control fluid velocity with a variable speed drive (VSD) or variable frequency drive (VFD). These drives replace valves which impede flow and decrease the energy use of a motor by 20%. Conventional and legacy systems use valves to regulate flow. Valves tend to be set and forgotten. A VSD/VFD is cost-effective for motors as small as 1 hp.

Consider the circumference of pipes and ductwork to reduce friction. A 2-in. pipe will move four times the volume of fluid as a 1-in. pipe with the same amount of friction.

Typical motor losses

Typical motor losses include:

• electrical distribution losses
• controller losses
• motor losses
• coupling losses
• driven load losses
• load modulation

After these losses, a typical system will only maintain less than 40% of its useful work, with over 60% being lost. An optimized system will not suffer from these losses and will maintain 100% of its useful work.

Power quality

PQ controls and filters support system reliability to reduce motor wear and tear, and the frequency of unplanned downtime. Mechanical breakdowns that idle workers, damages packaging and spills product can be eight to ten times the cost of replacing a motor.

PQ control impacts when a 1 hp motor fails

Motor

PQ control:

• A 1 hp motor runs for one shift all year using 1,000 kWh of electricity. Source: Prism Engineering
• Cost of electricity is $0.16/kWh for a Class B user at peak (based upon Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO rates in 2018).

Local impact:

• Costs associated at the point of occurrence

Continuous impact:

• Costs associated beyond the point of impact

Motor degradation

PQ control:

• PQ issues exist in the form of sags and swells that constantly impact and degrade motor quality
• There are 20 to 40 PQ events per year

Local impact:

• PQ issues increase electrical use of motor by up to 20%, equaling a total estimated impact of $16 per year

Continuous impact:

• None

Motor failure

PQ control:

• A 1 hp motor fails on a processing line
• 10 workers are idled for 15 minutes
• Line is down for 1.5 hours while motor is replaced
• Cost of replacement motor is $300
• Cost of labour is $22/hour
• Line speed is 200 cases per hour
• Value per case is $25
• Gross margin per case is 25%
• No overtime
• 5 cases of material lost by failure

Local impact:

• $300 to replace motor
• $55 in idled labour (10 × $22 × .25)
• Lost production (200 cases× 1.5 hours)
• $625 in lost gross margin
• $125 inputs lost to waste (5 cases × $25/case)
• Total estimated impact: $1,105 per occurrence

Continuous impact:

• Motor failure after only 3 years (or at only 60% of its expected life) is a loss of $120 (40% of $300)
• $330 in additional labour to replace lost production (10 workers for 1.5 hours at $22/hour)
• 1 hour of cleanup for 2 workers ($44)
• Total estimated impact: $374 per occurrence

Total cost of a PQ event involving a single 1 hp motor

$16 + $1,105 + $374 = $1,495 (taken from above local and continuous impact costs). According to Siemens, PQ corrections have been shown to increase facility throughput per hour by 6%.

The hidden cost of PQ events:

• Facilities with less than $25,000 per year of utility costs: $250 per event
• Facilities with $25,000 to $150,000 per year of utility costs: up to $2,500 per event
• Facilities with more than $300,000 per year of utility costs: up to $25,000 per event
• Facilities with more than $1,000,000 per year of utility costs: up to $250,000 per event

These impacts are based upon an industry observation where 20 to 40 PQ events per year resulted in more than 10 processing line interruptions per year. In the actual plant power quality events were tracked where each event cost $2,500 in identified costs per event. The illustrated example assumes one motor failure which happened once in three years and itemizes costs that are lower than the example upon which it was based.

The payback on fluid efficiency and PQ solutions ranges between 1 and 3 years based on energy savings. Lower pump and motor replacement and maintenance costs will also occur where fluid and electricity flows are optimized. The ratio of maintenance savings to energy savings is conservatively estimated to be 25% of the energy savings.

Utility metering

Utility metering helps resolve system reliability and system efficiency.

The first challenge is the reliability of automated equipment. PQ controls are part of this equation. The other half of system reliability is how maintenance works. A conventional maintenance team will fix equipment after it fails. This practice works in a mechanical environment where skilled maintenance teams can use touch, sound and smell to diagnose mechanical issues as they occur. Automated equipment is fitted with semiconductors. This is computerized equipment that will fail because of PQ issues from the electricity supply and PQ issues from the condition of the motors they regulate. The condition of the mechanical components can be monitored through utility metering. Maintenance teams with the tools and skills to monitor the equipment in their plant can proactively repair and replace equipment before it degrades to the point that power sags and surges corrupt computerized components.

The second challenge is related to managing the energy, water, ingredient and labour efficiency of a processing line. Utility metering is a cost control tool. According to Siemens, energy inflation has averaged 6% per year over the last three decades. When integrated, real time metering systems are not in place, energy audits are needed every two to three years. Engineers come in and measure, provide a dozen projects to plant managers who then take two or three years to action that list. When the audit engineers return a few years later, all the efficiency gains are lost because of utility creep (inflation plus the lack of utility measurement that would alert managers to a problem). System efficiency can be measured, tracked and managed.

A food processing facility that automates can expect energy use increase by 10%. The increase drops to about 5% with an Energy Management Information System (EMIS) where staff have the skill sets to analyze and interpret utility data.

Human error

Noise can be built into systems or overlooked. Human error refers to unnecessary utility use.

Facility downtime

Lighting and equipment can be left on or running after production runs are ended. A simple walk through on the weekend to identify what was left on can allow you to identify areas for improvement. Some equipment needs cooling time, while other equipment needs warming time. Coordinating startup and shut down procedures, practicing those procedures and following up to ensure procedures are followed is a skillset.

Lights left on can add 20% to lighting costs and wears out ballasts. Motors, air compressors and conveyors left idling use electricity, add wear to equipment, and affect power factor costs. These are avoidable costs with an impact on overhead absorption. How well a factory rests helps you understand how well it runs.

Correcting human error

Correcting human error requires having a high level of vigilance, observation, experience and learning.

Vigilance works if managers commit to the time it takes to enforce behavior. Vigilance has limits. The more time one spends upon the shop floor, the harder it is to observe problems. Gradual wear on equipment goes unnoticed with sensory fatigue. Vigilance can avoid perhaps half of the avoidable electricity waste and water leaks. Regular maintenance sweeps with hand-held thermal sensors, Canadian Industrial Program for Energy Conservation (CIPEC) training, sub meters and EMIS are elements of preventative maintenance behaviour.

Best management practices

A detailed discussion of the foundational BMPs is found in the playbook for inputs. The list is a starting point and is not exhaustive. Consider exploring CIPEC and lean practices supported by the Excellence in Manufacturing Consortium. Books written about executive buy-in, effective project management and team building will tell you an executive must lead, and a project manager may be one person or many, depending upon the project. The project manager’s team of managers, supervisors and staff will vary based upon the project. Some projects will have a select team, others will need cross-functional representation. Training and behavior management may also depend upon what gets adopted.

Technology

A detailed discussion of the foundational technologies is found in the playbook for inputs.

Cyber security is an emerging problem. More than half of all small businesses fail after a cyberattack. All these technologies cost-effectively reduce economic and environmental risks.

The following table illustrates the scale of a business and LLOYD Factor actions. The reason for these actions (training and technology investments) is, in part, the impact that they have on the management and skill sets required in the following process stage. These actions are the building blocks for data management. A rough order of sales magnitude is one way to discern what actions may be cost effective. More importantly, the skills, training and BMPs that are critical for a small processor just starting out, are as important at a well-established global facility. Effective manufacturing management requires measurement capacity and skills. People change jobs and move. As a company grows, the items in Table 2 provide guidance for basic skill sets and practices as a business expands.

Small operations with net revenue below $250,000 are likely to have energy and water use profiles that may not justify the capital expense of power factor correction, power quality controls, sub-metering and EMIS on their own. These technologies improve the outcomes of takt time analysis, activity-based costing, lean and ultimately carbon management.

Utility management training offered through the Office of Energy Efficiency is a starting point for developing data management skills. The knowledge and skills gained through this training works at any level of a business.

Efficiency training

In any plan where a team is involved in the pursuit of efficiency, there must be lots of practice. In a manufacturing environment, training is practice and it is integral to the game plan. Skill development accelerates when training (practice) relates to the plays in your game plan. The technologies, tools and practices listed in Table 2 are the core practice drills needed to achieve profitable synergy when producing a product for lower carbon market demand. The skills learned using these technologies are building blocks for digital automation and carbon management.

CIPEC training, for example, is money well-spent for even the smallest facility, as is sub-metering an electrical panel combined with an EMIS system. Larger facilities should investigate more comprehensive systems.

LLOYD factor correction synergies

To reduce noise throughout a manufacturing process, it helps to create a progressive synergy.

First, metering and digital mapping correct legacy equipment settings and gross margin inaccuracy. Next, performing takt time analysis and revising product costing create baseline and real time measurement for predictive maintenance and input cost control. Lastly, leak detection and repair as well as power factor and power quality upgrades eliminate avoidable input and process variance and waste.

Time required to implement LLOYD factor and human error corrections

After the walkthrough audit and procedural corrections, implementing human error requires:

• 1 month to change behaviour
• 6 months for training, sub-metering, EMIS and preventative maintenance practice

The LLOYD factor takes 1–3 years to implement.

With training and these technologies in place, lean manufacturing practices become easier to do. Easy improvement opportunities may continue to emerge for 5–10 years as equipment ages and the business grows. The key is to be able to catch and reduce cost variance faster than the rate of inflation of those costs.