NLGI UPDATE
Designing Grease
Distribution Systems
Is Bigger Always Better?
BY RICHARD BURKHALTER, COVENANT ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
I
s bigger always better? Not in the case of grease distribu-
tion systems. This article explores some of the more
common problems with designing grease distribution
systems, highlighting several issues that could lead to
improper sizing.
Bulk vs. Individual Containers
Three major factors that must be considered when
choosing the method of receipt for grease include opera-
tional needs, grease consumption by type and volume, and
total cost impact. For instance, the volume may be large, but
if several greases are used at various times, a bulk system may
not be the best choice. Changeover expense and the risk of
adverse affects from contamination between greases may
outweigh the cost savings normally achieved with bulk deliv-
eries. Furthermore, if flexibility of the operation requires
usage units to access separate greases at different times, a
central system and bulk grease would be more of a detriment
than a benefit. Elements such as volume, operating time,
product(s) used and cost are all major factors to be evalu-
ated when choosing a system.
Grease Storage
The most efficient way to store grease is in bulk tanks.
However, there are numerous considerations in selecting a
storage system. Obviously, bulk versus packaged receipt
carries a major cost consideration. Hidden factors should
not be overlooked when evaluating the options. The same
factors apply when considering bulk versus packaged distri-
bution. Even if packaged distribution is considered the best
for the operation, bulk receipt with subsequent on-site pack-
aging could be a possibility if the annual volume of a grease
product is sufficient. Intermediate bulk containers (IBC) can
be filled on-site, either from a bulk tank within the facility or
52 January - February 2008 machinerylubrication.com
directly from the tank truck. Storage space, maneuver space
and labor are all factors that affect the selection.
Location and Disposal
An important factor often overlooked is the physical loca-
tion of the bulk grease tank in relation to the unloading spot.
Environmental aspects (heat and cold) can impact unloading
operations. The lack of heat tracing and/or insulation on the
lines can result in high-pressure requirements for the
unloading pump, resulting in a ruptured hose. If the
hydraulics have not been properly calculated for grease
unloading, excessive time and damage could be encountered
when unloading a bulk grease truck. Because grease is a non-
Newtonian, pseudo-plastic fluid, calculations must be based
on the actual shear rate characteristics for the selected
grease. Keep in mind that if the grease is changed, the new
shear rate data must be used to check the hydraulics.
If direct receipt of packaged grease is considered, factor in
the storage space and handling required and the disposal of
the empty containers. Empty IBCs may need to be returned to
the supplier; this adds the return freight and container repair
costs to the ultimate cost of the grease. If drums are used, the
user may experience additional costs for empty drum
disposal, which in some cases could be high depending on
local environmental regulations.
Distribution
Bulk/Central Systems - The design of a grease central
distribution system must consider not only the volume of
grease used but the distribution of the grease to the using
units by rate, distance from the source, environmental condi-
tions (mainly temperature) and the grease-specific shear rate
data. Unfortunately, a typical error in the development of
hydraulic calculations is using methods common to
Machinery Lubrication
Newtonian fluids, which will likely result in oversizing the
lines. Oversizing the lines is one case where bigger is seldom
better. Oversized lines will cause the grease to channel
through the middle of the pipe, cutting a “doughnut hole”
and leaving stagnant grease along the walls. The larger the
pipe, the larger the stagnant layer. Depending on the grease,
the stagnant layer can harden. This creates the potential to
break off solid particles that can clog distribution nozzles.
Furthermore, if the grease being pumped through the distri-
bution system is changed, it will be difficult to clean the line
of the old grease prior to introducing the new grease. If the
old grease is not cleared from the line, there is a contamina-
tion risk between the new and old grease that may affect the
end user.
Another factor when considering a central distribution
system is flexibility of the supported system and the potential
for expansion. A central system does not lend itself to flexible
operations. If flexibility is needed, a parallel system could be
installed to provide the using unit flexible access to a second
grease product. Economics will usually dictate the value of
parallel central systems.
Machinery Lubrication
Drum/IBC System - Operational flexibility may dictate if
grease is received by drum or IBC, though it may have a
higher unit cost and require extra handling. Multiple prod-
ucts and the corresponding lower annual volume for each
product tend to shift the decision to local distribution
systems. The same considerations outlined above should be
included in the decision and design process. However, the use
of grease supplied in drums can aggravate the logistics of the
supply to the user, as well as result in additional house-
keeping problems. On the other hand, grease supplied in
IBCs can alleviate some of the logistics of the supply, but may
result in partially filled bins when changeovers occur.
Partially filled bins often contain wasted grease which
impacts the overall cost.
When considering the installation or modification of a
grease supply system for multiple users, the factors listed in
this article are among many that must be considered when
selecting and designing the distribution system. Improperly
sized systems can be detrimental to a cost-effective opera-
tion, both in the present and the future. Neither large nor
small is, by nature, better.
machinerylubrication.com January - February 2008 53