ZERO TOLERANCE TO LEAKAGE AT ASDA - The practical steps toward total containment
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
ZERO TOLERANCE TO LEAKAGE AT ASDA.
The practical steps toward total containment
Brian Churchyard MinstR, ASDA and John Bonner, City Holdings
Summary
Effective refrigeration delivery is as much about attitudes and behaviours toward good engineering
practices as it is the technology. Historic impact of inefficient and leaking refrigeration systems has
left food retailers exposed to; excessive system life cycle costs, trading risk and accountability for
significant long term damage to the environment. The logical focus area in tackling these
inefficient, leaky systems subsequently limiting and reducing potential environmental damage is
the integrity of; system design, its implementation and on going maintenance, regardless of the
refrigerant of choice.
If actual environmental impact is through carbon emitted from energy production (where fossil
fuelled power generation is concerned) then the most energy efficient refrigeration and/or air
conditioning systems are critical in reducing actual carbon output. It is not enough to focus sole
attention on a refrigerants GWP. In future system delivery gas tightness should be a given, “Zero
Tolerance to Gas Leakage” is a behaviour, an attitude which should come second nature within the
engineering acumen and driven by this community.
Zero Tolerance to Gas Leakage
The food retailer does not knowingly procure leaking and inefficient refrigeration technology.
However, we seemingly have an industry that is potentially installing these technologies within
inappropriate time scales, unable to carry out the necessary checks and balances to reduce the
risk of leakage and life cycle inefficiencies. Is this a desperate attempt to meet the client’s non-
technically driven expectation? With the supplier having a relatively weak voice to ensure good
practices are adhered too? Or is this nothing more than a lack of attention to engineering detail and
a slip in standards? Enhancements to existing regulation looms once again, focusing on the
refrigerants “potential” to cause environmental damage, looking to reduce the environmental
impact of refrigerants through ban/phase down strategies. Ironically, regulation may leave the cost
sensitive food retailer having to invest far greater levels of capital and revenue to comply with
regulatory adjustments. These legislative adjustments are borne out of a need to reduce cost in the
first instance, is this a self defeating cycle? It is simply not enough to rely purely on technology to
fix this seemingly endless cycle of change, yes up skilling is useful but arguably meaningless if
good engineering practices are not consistently adhered too and applied in every aspect from
design and installation through to life time servicing.
New system technologies could take anywhere between 15 and 30 years to implement estate wide
with their benefits only being enjoyed during this period. Long term durability testing and analysis is
usually necessary to identify the true benefits and pit fails of the latest technical thinking, needing
to mature and evolve, as does the skills base to support them. Ideally the industry should remain
technically flexible capturing largely unknown technologies of the future.
The technology should not only be environmentally sustainable but financially sustainable. It is a
healthy investment return which will better support any accelerated roll out of emerging technology.
The benefits of reducing electrical consumption and carbon emissions within an existing
refrigeration portfolio are not limited to the environment; if addressed in an appropriate manner
they can also deliver significant operational efficiencies. The cost of electricity will increase over
the coming years, as will the cost of carbon output. This presents businesses with an opportunity to
further invest but only if technical flexibility remains supported through regulation.
B. Churchyard & J. Bonner 1 ©Institute of Refrigeration Annual Conference 2013Refrigerant gas leakage and carbon emissions Refrigerant leakage reduction and system containment is essential. Responsible management of any refrigeration system, its delivery in design/installation through to on going system maintenance is critical, irrelevant of the system type or refrigerant of choice; if you do not control leakage it will end up controlling you. The commercial refrigeration industry has seemingly convinced itself that refrigerant containment and leakage reduction to near zero levels may never be achieved. However, it is not refrigerants that leak; it is the systems within which these refrigerants are held being the source of leakage. Yet there appears to be an on going obsession with delivering near zero GWP refrigerants rather than driving near zero leakage containment strategies. A difficult question may be. “Is delivering a near zero GWP technology not more appropriate for a system that we know will leak, a just in case scenario”? As obvious as this may be, it is relevant when looking at an overall strategy; address system integrity and the refrigerant of choice could remain an area of technical flexibility, driven by energy efficiencies, system reliabilities and best value. Should the end user not be able to responsibly manage leakage within its refrigerated fleet (regardless of the refrigerant of choice), then moving to newly developed technologies could present significant challenges, as well as driving further complications in to an already stretched supply and contracting base. Consistency in delivery Large food retailers may have significant year on year growth and activity, remodelling stores, extending existing stores, acquiring property for conversion and constructing new stores. This activity is fast moving, intensive and is undertaken in such a way so to minimise disruption to its customers. To be successful at this, a detailed and consistent approach must be adopted to refrigeration delivery, especially when delivering these large scale refrigeration projects or roll outs. Design and formatting parameters, detailed installation methods and agreed minimum time scales are just a few areas which require clear direction from the outset. The industry should be knowledgeable enough to detail to their clients the benefits of delivering best engineering practises and the benefit brought through equipment life cycle costs. The client can easily measure the compliance and benefits of these practises by ensuring minimum standards are met, captured through a simple auditing process. Measuring performance and setting targets will assist the contractor in enhancing their operation and compliance to the standards. Consistent delivery, measurement and target setting across design and installation of systems can also help identify areas of concern or consistent failure. These concerns can be addressed separately and be aligned quickly for a positive outcome. Losing sight of a consistent approach will almost certainly support inefficiencies, driving higher operational costs and drive complexities over the operational life of a system, seen through reactive service structures which are difficult to manage. If it is not measured it is not managed. Reliability Reliable delivery of refrigeration systems, design, installation, commissioning, service and maintenance is absolutely critical for the food retailer. Each of these disciplines must be delivered in such a way that they complement and enhance one another. Too often these activities are dealt with in isolation not considering the cascade effect from the outset, the easiest and quickest in the case of commercial refrigeration delivery is by no means best, leaving the end user unwittingly suffering the consequences and costs over a systems operational life. There is a huge cost and risk burden to a business if each of these disciplines are not appropriately and professionally managed and implemented. The key risk areas for the food retailer are ‘safety and trading risk’. If a retailer cannot trade effectively from its refrigeration equipment then its investments and returns become negatively impacted losing faith in the industry it relies upon. Life cycle ownership of design, installation and servicing without question brings great value. Design, installation and commissioning methods, once aligned, result in reliable systems that service engineers understand and can maintain with confidence. Taking a proactive service approach minimises faults and downtime, reducing both costs and carbon emissions. B. Churchyard & J. Bonner 2 ©Institute of Refrigeration Annual Conference 2013
Equipment sourcing
Implementing appropriate approval methods for new refrigerated display or plant equipment is
another significant opportunity for a food retailer. The potential impact of introducing any new or
less known equipment or technologies is a major risk area for any large food retailer. Those who
carry out design, installation, commissioning, service and maintenance are best placed to assist in
making decisions regarding which kit may be appropriate to the application,. Trust and listen to the
experts, trial and evaluate the technology over a reasonable period (12 months). Understand the
detail as best you can, be led by the engineering facts not the emotion. Trial not error!
Design defects can become extremely costly and time consuming to rectify for the end user,
especially where the business is achieving high annual growth and can have a significant negative
impact on the environment.
Table 1 Typical average annual leak rate (existing fleet)
ASDA’s strategic approach to refrigeration delivery in their supermarkets can be summarised in the
following bullets:
Smart Engineering
Simple
Measurable
Accountable
Reliable
Time Sensitive
City Facilities Maintenance Philosophy (In partnership with ASDA)
A strict planned preventative maintenance schedule is adopted for every refrigeration asset within
the operator’s estate from day one of installation.
Each piece of refrigeration equipment should have a scheduled maintenance visit planned
appropriate to the risk of leakage experienced using historical data.
This approach is taken to ensure that minimum leakage occurs over the lifetime of all the
refrigeration equipment in the estate.
All engineers are assigned to specific stores and take ownership of all the refrigeration equipment
and issues within each of their assigned stores.
Engineers are grouped together in teams of four, in each operating cluster; this allows each
operating cluster to work as a localised team and is controlled under the supervisor of a regional
refrigeration supervisor.
Each supervisor controls up to four clusters of four refrigeration engineers.
Example of engineers clusters structure.
B. Churchyard & J. Bonner 3 ©Institute of Refrigeration Annual Conference 2013Regional
Refrigeration
Supervisor
Cluster Cluster Cluster Cluster
1 1 1 1
Engineer Engineer Engineer Engineer
No 1 No 2 No 3 No 4
Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store Store
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Table 2 Typical Store cluster structure
The key benefits from this are that it allows the engineers within each cluster to support one
another and utilise each individuals key strengths, knowledge, experience and expertise within the
refrigeration industry.
General and Preventative Maintenance Procedures
All maintenance procedures are laid down in the engineer’s daily way of working briefing pack.
They are set out to ensure that the engineer’s time spent on these activities is utilised to give
maximum benefit from this important activity.
The engineer must complete specifically designed pre-planned maintenance (PPM)
documentation for each piece of refrigeration equipment; these documents are designed to be
specific to each type of refrigeration equipment and are laid out in such a way that the work is
completed in a logical manner.
Annual major PPMs must be completed twice a year for the following main refrigeration
equipment.
1. Main refrigeration plant.
2. Remote Condensers
3. Condensing unit
4. HT & LT coldrooms
A minor refrigeration PPM health check is completed on a monthly basis, which encompasses
thorough leak testing of all refrigeration systems (including systems with < 3 kgs HFC refrigerants)
and tasks are carried out to comply with planned maintenances schedules on the following
equipment.
1. All shop floor remote cases.
2. All integrals.
3. All refrigeration packs.
4. All condensing units.
5. All HT & LT coldrooms.
B. Churchyard & J. Bonner 4 ©Institute of Refrigeration Annual Conference 2013Store
Refrigeration
Engineer
Minor
Major Refrigeration
Refrigeration PPM
PPM Health
Check
Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly
Major Major
Health Health Health Health Health Health Health Health Health Health Health Health
PPM PPM
Check Check Check Check Check Check Check Check Check Check Check Check
No 1 No 2
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Table 3 Refrigeration PPM store structure
Performance Monitoring
Performance of both refrigeration systems and engineers is achieved by setting key performance
indicator (KPIs) targets and monitoring of certain data for the areas listed below;
1. All service calls logged will have assigned key performance indicators (KPIs) for the following;
A. Response time.
B. Repair time.
C First fix.
2. Refrigeration equipment uptime has KPIs set for all stores.
These are calculated using the in house operating systems which record times of when service
calls are logged and the completion of service calls. The system then calculates the uptime in
proportion to the amount of assets on site and available trading hours.
3. Refrigerant Usage KPIs-- Store & System specific.
Each store is assigned an annual leakage in Kgs, this is calculated using the historical usage data
for each site and also the annual leakage target set for the following year. Stores with higher
leakage rates, are set tougher percentage reductions for the following year, this is to drive down
refrigerant usage in the worst stores.
4. Leakage coding estate, store and systems specific.
All data collected under the F Gas regulations is used to produce a leak coding data base.
By reviewing and utilising this additional data, we can ensure engineers tasks, in terms of planned
leak testing, is focused on the areas where the greatest risk of leaks is currently being found.
5. Refrigeration temperature performance indicators (TPIs)
The refrigeration monitoring and alarm systems are set up to utilise all available software within
the refrigeration alarm panel.
One of the tools which can be used is the TPIs function. This function is utilised by the onsite
engineers to pre warn of any issues which will affect the refrigeration systems performance and
also encourages a pro active approach to service and maintenance delivery.
B. Churchyard & J. Bonner 5 ©Institute of Refrigeration Annual Conference 2013The system may be set up to generate TPI alarms, but caution must be taken when using this, as
parameters must be discussed and agreed between both the operator and the service provider.
This approach will increase alarms traffic and also service call volumes.
Leak Testing
Planned leak testing in every store, which is completed by the onsite engineer, forms a core part of
the service and maintenance strategy to ensure the control of leakage and also the year on year
reduction of refrigerant usage due to system leakage. This is even when we see the number of
stores opening, increasing year on year.
It must be understood that it is not the refrigerant that leaks; it is the system components which fail,
causing the refrigerant to leak.
All stores have major PPMs and a monthly health check planned on an annual basis, both of these
activities involve the leak testing of all refrigeration equipment.
By adopting this procedure we are exceeding the F Gas regulations in terms of how often leak
testing should be carried out and the results are clearly showing that if you adopt the minimum F
Gas regulations leak testing periods, you will struggle to control leakage.
Table 4 Control of leakage flow chart
B. Churchyard & J. Bonner 6 ©Institute of Refrigeration Annual Conference 2013Records and Record Keeping All records for refrigerants are collated centrally by an F Gas administrator. Refrigerant usage is reported on a daily basis to the regional refrigeration supervisor and all senior teams, this is to ensure that all gas usage is known to all involved. The administrator ensures that all refrigerant usage is recorded in accordance with the EU F Gas regulations. All engineers are responsible for the correct information being recorded on the F Gas logs held centrally. The administrator ensures compliance with support from the regional refrigeration supervisors and national refrigeration manager. F Gas paperwork returns are tracked by the administrator. Using records and targets to drive improvements All collated F Gas and additional data is used to produce the following refrigerant usage reports, which are used to drive the focus where above target refrigerant usage is being experienced. 1. Daily refrigerant usage, showing which stores have used what volumes of refrigerant, supervisors feedback on major issues and also under the trend of gas usage for each store and engineer. 2. Weekly National refrigerant usage, this reports shows year to date (YTD) usage, with detail for all stores which have used refrigerant in current year. 3. Monthly refrigerant usage report, this report shows gas usage against targets for the following, A. Monthly usage against national YTD target. B. Monthly usage against supervisor’s areas YTD target. C. Monthly usage against individual stores YTD target. 4. Monthly refrigerant leak coding report, this is a report generated using the information supplied by the engineers using refrigerant. The data is split into different areas within the refrigeration systems and is used to targets areas where the greatest risk of leaks is found, to help reduce leakage. Example of leak coding data table Table 5 Typical percentage leakage break down B. Churchyard & J. Bonner 7 ©Institute of Refrigeration Annual Conference 2013
You can also read
