CONDITION ASSESSMENT, REPAIR STRATEGY AND BUDGET …€¦ · Port Authority S.A. (“OLP” or “the Client”) to understand the damage and assess the associated immediate repair

HPC Hamburg Port Consulting GmbH

December 2015

OLP Piraeus Port Authority S.A.

Greece

CONDITION ASSESSMENT, REPAIR

STRATEGY AND BUDGET ESTIMATE

FOR OLP PIER 1 RMG CRANES

Draft Final Report

03/12/2015 17:17 Y:\PROJ\PPOS\26584_OLP RMG Yard\Report\OLP Pier 1 RMG Cranes_draft final.doc

OLP Piraeus Port Authority S.A.

Greece

CONDITION ASSESSMENT, REPAIR

STRATEGY AND BUDGET ESTIMATE

FOR OLP PIER 1 RMG CRANES

Draft Final Report

HPC Hamburg Port Consulting GmbH Container Terminal Altenwerder Am Ballinkai 1 21129 Hamburg Germany Phone: +49-40-74008-224 Fax: +49-40-74008-133 E-Mail: [email protected] Internet: http://www.hpc-hamburg.de

Copyright © by HPC 03/12/2015

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.hpc-hamburg.de/

OLP Pier 1 RMG Crane Assessment, Repair Strategy and Budget Estimate iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. RMG CRANE INSPECTION OVERVIEW AND RESULTS 2

2.1 Inspection Overview 2

2.1.1 Main Technical Data 2

2.1.2 Equipment Overview 3

2.2 Inspection Results 4

2.2.1 General Findings 4

2.2.2 Detailed Findings per RMG 12

3. RMG CRANE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES 20

3.1 Repair Activities and Cost Estimates 20

3.1.1 Repair Costs due to Rail Settlements 20

3.1.2 Further Repair Costs 20

3.1.3 Repair Strategy 21

3.2 Maintenance Activities and Cost Estimates 22

3.2.1 General Maintenance Considerations 22

3.2.2 Maintenance Situation at OLP 23

3.2.3 Maintenance Costs 23

4. SUMMARY 25

ANNEX

Annex 1: Maintenance Cost Plan RMG Cranes

iv OLP Pier 1 RMG Crane Assessment, Repair Strategy and Budget Estimate


TABLE OF FIGURES Page

Figure 1: Gantry Wheels 5

Figure 2: Modified Bearings 6

Figure 3: Pin Connection between Sill Beam and Gantry System 6

Figure 4: Operator’s Cabin Door 7

Figure 5: Cage at Operator’s Cabin 8

Figure 6: Oil Pollution 8

Figure 7: Spreader without Flippers 9

Figure 8: Cable Trays 10

Figure 9: Cable Grommets 10

Figure 10: Cable Damages 11

Figure 11: Findings RMG01 12








OLP Pier 1 RMG Crane Assessment, Repair Strategy and Budget Estimate v


LIST OF TABLES Page

Table 1: Main Equipment Dimensions and Capacities 3

Table 2: Inspected Equipment Overview 4

Table 3: Equipment Repair Cost Estimation (Gantry Systems) 20

Table 4: Equipment Repair Cost Estimation (Other) 21

Table 5: Equipment Maintenance Cost Estimation (per Year) 24

OLP Pier 1 RMG Crane Assessment, Repair Strategy and Budget Estimate 1


1. INTRODUCTION

The OLP Pier 1 terminal has experienced settlements in the RMG yard, especially

on the rails which affect operational performance and usability of the area. With

damages on the RMG cranes impacting operations, HPC Hamburg Port

Consulting GmbH (“HPC” or “the Consultant”) has been engaged by OLP Piraeus

Port Authority S.A. (“OLP” or “the Client”) to understand the damage and assess

the associated immediate repair costs and finally obtain insights in maintenance

cost estimates of the same over the next 30 years.

Scope of the present report is the condition assessment, repair strategy and budget

estimate for Pier 1 RMG cranes.

The data required for the underlying survey was provided by OLP. Further data

collection was conducted during the site visit to OLP Pier 1 terminal carried out

by the Consultant’s technical experts on the 10th

and 11th

of November 2015. The

site visit included an in-depth discussion with the OLP container terminal’s

management, the heads of the operations and the maintenance department as well

as employees from OLP’s technical department. The in-depth discussion was

followed by a guided visit of the Consultant’s experts by OLP’s authorized

personnel in the container terminal facilities. During the visit, a visual inspection

of the RMG yard area has been carried out to assess general working conditions as

well as major visible deficiencies and deteriorations. The focus of this inspection

was on damages caused by the above mentioned settlements.

2 OLP Pier 1 RMG Crane Assessment, Repair Strategy and Budget Estimate


2. RMG CRANE INSPECTION OVERVIEW AND

RESULTS

This section provides the results of the assessment of the OLP Pier 1 RMG

cranes obtained from visual inspection. Further to this, a repair and

maintenance strategy will be elaborated and an estimation of costs

associated with this strategy will be provided.

2.1 Inspection Overview

The RMG crane inspection carried out by the Consultant’s technical experts

focused on potential damages caused by a local settlement of the gantry rails. In

order to precede this, the technical experts relied on international standards for

port handling equipment of this size. The study was performed using methods and

procedures that are consistent with good commercial and customary practice.

Every reasonable effort was made to ensure the accuracy of the data forming the

basis of this assessment.

The inspection consisted of a visual inspection only and was performed by a

mechanical engineer. Components were not disassembled. Dynamic or load tests

were not part of the proceedings either. The engineer focused mainly on the

damages and wear and tear found at the gantry systems due to above mentioned

rail settlements. Furthermore, a brief visual inspection of other mechanical and

electrical components was performed.

During the survey, the Consultant’s technical experts received as-build drawings

of the RMG cranes and main technical specifications from OLP for further use.

2.1.1 Main Technical Data

The inspection focused on all eight RMG cranes currently installed in the RMG

yard. All eight RMG cranes were manufactured by Greek company Rokas based

on a design prepared by Italian company MGM-OMG. The following Table 1

indicates main dimensions and capacities of the RMGs.



Table 1: Main Equipment Dimensions and Capacities

Description Capacity/Dimension

Lifting capacity below spreader: 40 t

Lifting capacity with hook: 55 t

Span (rail centre distance): 42,500 mm

Cantilever from rail centre (fixed post side): 12,500 mm

Cantilever from rail centre (hinged side): 11,000 mm

Outreach (fixed post side): 7,000 mm

Outreach (hinged side): 7,000 mm

Total trolley travelling path: 56,500 mm

Height under spreader: 18,300 mm

Clearance between portal legs: 16,000 mm

Overall length from buffer to buffer, max: 25,900 mm

Rail size: A 100

Number of wheels per corner/diameter: 8/630 mm

Number of individually driven wheels per corner: 50%

Hoisting speed (with 40 t): 30 m/min

Hoisting speed (with empty spreader): 60 m/min

Trolley speed: 120 m/min

Gantry speed (with 40 t): 100 m/min

Maximum vertical track load: 28 t/m

Maximum single wheel load: 25.5 t

Minimum gantry wheel distance: 900 mm

Total RMG weight: 442 t

Power supply: 20 kV/50 Hz

Source: OLP, Nov. 2015

2.1.2 Equipment Overview

The RMG equipment of Pier 1 that was inspected by the technical experts can be

found in Table 2 below. The table also contains all hour meter readings carried out

during the inspections on 10th

and 11th

November 2015.



Table 2: Inspected Equipment Overview

Equipment Year of

Manufacture

First Year of

Operation

Operating Hours

Hoist Trolley Gantry

RMG01 2009 2010 7,583 6,263 2,667

RMG02 2009 2010 9,200 7,585 2,745

RMG03 2009 2010 8,119 6,715 3,481

RMG04 2009 2010 8,215 6,771 2,773

RMG05 2010 2010 2,634 2,202 831

RMG06 2010 2010 8,121 6,822 2,572

RMG07 2010 2010 7,536 6,475 2,696

RMG08 2010 2010 6,178 5,292 2,060

Source: OLP/HPC, Nov. 2015

2.2 Inspection Results

2.2.1 General Findings

All RMGs were declared by OLP’s technical staff being ready for operation

whereas in particular those RMGs at the outer ends of the two container stacks

(R1 and R2) were partially found with rust on the gantry wheels showing very few

movements in the recent past. This is obviously due to the position in the stack

and the current traffic (container stack R2 was found almost empty). The overall

condition of the RMGs was fair and the overall operating hours were much lower

than expected for a period of five years in operation (see Table 2).

As stated above, the main purpose of the inspections was a mechanical assessment

of damages caused by the settlement of the gantry rails.

Particular attention during inspections was given to the gantry systems and the

gantry wheel flange damages which could be observed in connection with those

damages occurred at the gantry rails. OLP technical staff reported that some RMG

gantry wheels were turned by 180 degrees as the flange on one side of the wheel

was worn off. Some extremely damaged wheels were entirely replaced by new

ones. The worst damages of wheel flanges were found on RMG03.

An inspection of a new wheel in the workshop area showed that the dimensions of

this wheel were according to the technical specification in terms of outer width of

180mm and inner running surface (between flanges) of 115mm (Figure 1).



Figure 1: Gantry Wheels

New (outer width 180 mm) Worn out (outer width > 180 mm)

Typical damage (wheel, rail) Typical damage

Source: HPC, Nov. 2015

It was noted that the wheel alignment was insufficient for all gantry systems (four

per RMG, one per corner). Gantry wheel flanges were touching the gantry rails on

both sides (waterside respectively landside of the rail) even within one single

corner of the RMG. It was understood that just after entry into operation the

manufacturer of the equipment was called again to the terminal in order to do

wheel alignment measurements and to re-align the gantry wheels. In the course of

this action bearings were modified for the gantry system (Figure 2). It was

obvious that necessary additional welding was done after painting.



Figure 2: Modified Bearings


Some of the pins which are connecting the sill beam and the gantry system are no

longer locked against rotation as the anti-twist protections (fixed metal sheets)

were missing or dismantled. Some of the pins were twisted inside the outer sill

beam flange which is objectionable.

Figure 3: Pin Connection between Sill Beam and Gantry System

Anti-twist protection not functional Anti-twist protection missing


For a sustainable rehabilitation of the RMGs it is recommended to change all

gantry wheels (32 per RMG) and to change / repair pin connections between sill

beam and gantry system where deemed necessary. After this a professional wheel

alignment and measurement must be carried out before re-entering into

operations.

Further to the above mentioned damages some other mechanical damages which

cannot be directly attributable to the rail settlement have been observed during site



visit inspection. These damages are described in the following and have been

considered in the calculation of the repair and maintenance costs.

It was understood that side rollers were installed for the trolley wheels (on one

side of the trolley only) after the operator found the trolley side guidance

insufficient and therefore raised a respective claim. According to OLP’s technical

staff there were no problems experienced with the trolley side guidance since

then.

Furthermore it was understood that the initial design of the trolley was without a

machinery house (M-house) covering the machinery on top of the trolley

including hoist system and trolley motors. After intervention of the operator the

M-house roof was added.

As the initial paint quality was obviously poor, on top of the girders corrosion was

found (partially in weld seam areas).

The operator’s cabin doors couldn’t be fixed when opened respectively a stopper

was not existing; hence the door glass is broken on most of the RMGs, refer to

Figure 4.

Figure 4: Operator’s Cabin Door


A design problem was obvious for the cage at the upper part of the ladder at the

rear side of the operator’s cabins. OLP’s technical staff reported that this cage

may collide with the cross beam between the two girders of the RMG when the

trolley is moved to the very back (waterside). As a consequence these cages where

damaged on most of the RMGs, refer to Figure 5.



Figure 5: Cage at Operator’s Cabin

OK Damaged


Consequently an overhaul of the operator’s cabins is recommended including all

glass ruptures as well as replacement or repair of safety devices such as the cage

at the rear of the cabin. In order to avoid any further damages of the cage, the

RMG control system should be modified in order to slow down and stop the

trolley before collision of the cage with the rear cross beam.

Inside the machinery house oil pollution was found below the hoist gear boxes on

most of the RMGs, refer to Figure 6 below. This should be further investigated as

the entire area is dirty due to recent rope changes and potential gear box leakages

should be detected and eliminated where deemed necessary. Only on RMG05 the

area was found comparatively clean whereas this RMG showed fewest operation

hours by far.

Figure 6: Oil Pollution


Cross beam



Moreover it was noted that on some RMGs the spreader flippers were missing and

not replaced so far (see Figure 7 below). It was understood during the visit that the

reason for the missing replacement or repair of the same was a shortage of spare

parts. It is recommended to carry out a spreader overhaul during which missing

flippers should not be replaced by new ones but to change all of them into fixed

corner guides in consultation with the spreader manufacturer, which will also

result in lower maintenance costs in the long run. Experience has shown that for

RMG operation fixed corner guides are the better choice compared with movable

ones currently in use at OLP.

Figure 7: Spreader without Flippers


2.2.1 Electrical

As stated above, the main purpose of the inspection was a mechanical assessment

of damages caused by the settlement of the gantry rails. However, some electrical

findings are highlighted below as there will be an impact on the overall repair

costs.

It was observed that for all cable trays mounted outside the steel structure a full

cover of the tray was not provided in order to protect the cabling from sunshine.

In this case it is important that cable ties must be UV-resistant which is obviously

not the case. For some RMGs cables started falling off in particular from vertical

trays at landside legs due to broken cable ties and the operator already started to

replace cable ties by new UV-resistant ones. Please refer to Figure 8 below.



Figure 8: Cable Trays


Figure 9 shows that cable grommets are not UV-resistant as well. Most of them

are damaged and the cables are now rubbing on the metal tubes.

Figure 9: Cable Grommets




Finally damages were detected concerning the cables inside the power chain on

top of the girder (Figure 10).

Figure 10: Cable Damages


It is recommended to carry out an overall electrical rehabilitation of the RMGs

including all cabling and the power chain on top of the girder as well as

introducing UV-resistant cable ties and grommets all over the equipment.

A spot check on one RMG showed that the spreader cable was repaired and hence

did not fit into the basket properly. This topic should be further investigated on all

RMGs.



2.2.2 Detailed Findings per RMG

This chapter summarised detailed findings per RMG by means of pictures taken

during the inspections. Apart from mechanical damages directly attributable to the

rail settlement, other mechanical damages as well as electrical deteriorations that

have been observed during site visit inspection are described.

Figure 11: Findings RMG01

RMG01 type placard Anti-twist protection not functional

Anti-twist protection not functional Door glass broken

Damages below elevator Gantry motor missing (being repaired)






Anti-twist protection not functional Anti-twist protection (detail)

Door glass broken Computer inside cabin missing


Note: On RMG02 the cage at the upper part of the ladder at the rear side of the operator’s cabins was damaged. One of the spreader flippers was also missing.




RMG03 type placard Wheel flange completely worn off

Wedge missing (gantry) Corrosion on top of girder (weld seam)



RMG04 type placard Anti-twist protection, bolt missing



Lower platform damaged Cable tray damaged

Door glass broken Two flippers missing






Anti-twist protection, bolt missing One flipper missing

Door can be fixed, OK New cable grommets



RMG06 type placard Lower platform damaged



Trolley rail repaired, broken again Cabin side glass broken

One flipper missing Cage damaged



RMG07 type placard Gantry wheel, excessive wear



Gantry wheel, excessive wear Door glass broken

Cage damaged



RMG08 type placard Rarely in use



Rarely in use Door glass broken

Cage damaged




3. RMG CRANE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE

ACTIVITIES

This section delivers an overview over the recommended repair and

maintenance measures based on the above described inspection results. In

addition, cost estimates associated with the recommended measures will

be provided.

3.1 Repair Activities and Cost Estimates

3.1.1 Repair Costs due to Rail Settlements

Based on the inspection results listed above, recommended repair works for the

RMG cranes include the change of all gantry wheels, the change / repair of pin

connections between sill beam and gantry system where deemed necessary and a

professional wheel alignment and measurement before re-entry into operations.

The following table summarizes the estimated repair costs due to the settlement of

the gantry rails which are estimated at 2.2 million EUR in total:

Table 3: Equipment Repair Cost Estimation (Gantry Systems)

Ref. Repair Works

Cost

estimation per

RMG

Cost Estimation

for Fleet (8 RMGs)

1.1 Change wheels on all gantries € 200,000.00 € 1,600,000

1.2

Change / repair pins (sill beam / gantry) where deemed necessary, i.e. anti-twist protection missing or not functional

€ 300,000

1.3

Wheel alignments and measurements

€ 36,000.00 € 300,000

One-off costs € 12,000.00

TOTAL ESTIMATED VALUE € 2,200,000


3.1.2 Further Repair Costs

Table 4 below summarizes the estimated costs for all further works to be carried

out in order to rehabilitate the equipment. These costs are estimated with 1.4

million EUR in total.



Table 4: Equipment Repair Cost Estimation (Other)

Ref. Repair Works Cost estimation

per RMG

Cost Estimation for

Fleet (8 RMGs)

2.1 Electric overhaul (incl. cabling and power chains, UV-resistant cable ties and grommets)

€ 150,000.00 € 1,200,000

2.2 Operator’s cabin overhaul (incl. glasses, safety equipment)

€ 15,000.00 € 120,000

2.3 Spreader overhaul (incl. new flippers) € 10,000.00 € 80,000

TOTAL ESTIMATED VALUE € 1,400,000


For a sustainable rehabilitation, the RMG cranes repair works have to be

accompanied by adequate repair works for the RMG yard area where severe

damages have been observed on the crane rail. The recommended repair works for

the yard area are outlined in the Consultant’s report on “Condition Assessment,

Repair Strategy and Budget Estimate for OLP Pier 1 RMG Yard Area” (2015).

3.1.3 Repair Strategy

All works described in Table 3 and Table 4 above with references 1.1 and 1.2 as

well as 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 can be performed beside the rails by shifting the RMG to

the side. Any side shifting of an RMG would be combined with the jacking up of

the equipment which will be necessary anyhow in order to repair the gantry

system. It goes without saying that the stack in the working area must allow for

such action, hence no containers are stacked in this area.

The only work that must be carried out on an already rehabilitated gantry rail is

the wheel alignment and measurement (Task 1.3 in Table 3) for which the

repaired RMG will be positioned on the new rail. This work must be done after

the repair of the gantry system repair itself (Tasks 1.1 and 1.2 in Table 3). The

estimated time to perform the wheel alignment and measurement is one week per

RMG. Consequently there is the need to block the stack after gantry rail

rehabilitation before the RMGs can return into operations. Due to the complexity

of the wheel alignment and measurement it is assumed that only one RMG can be

repaired at the same time resulting in a minimum of four weeks per stack.

Furthermore, all works described in Table 4 above with references 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3

(i. e. electric, operator’s cabin and spreader) can be carried out independently

from the gantry repair.



3.2 Maintenance Activities and Cost Estimates

3.2.1 General Maintenance Considerations

Maintenance is defined as the preventive and corrective activities required

keeping equipment or a facility in condition so that it may be utilised and

maintained at its assigned or designed capacity and efficiency. The maintenance

program shall be such as to provide for:

Disclosure of need for and the performance of normal maintenance,

Disclosure and reporting of the need for capital type rehabilitation,

and

Recording of the work accomplished under the program,

consistent with sound industrial practice.

Maintenance activities are subdivided into two types:

Preventive Maintenance (approx. 80% of total workload)

Corrective Maintenance (approx. 20% of total workload).

Preventive Maintenance

Preventive Maintenance (PM) is defined as those items of planned work required

on a periodic (i.e. daily, weekly, semi-monthly, monthly, quarterly, semi-annual

and annual) basis to prevent and/or delay failures in equipment and facilities. The

factors in considering the degree of PM to be employed are based upon reliability,

criticality and economics of the equipment/facility/system being maintained.

The PM program is implemented through a pre-planned Preventive Maintenance

Instruction (PMI).

The PMIs are based on the manufacturing recommendations, contract

requirements and/or engineering evaluations as to what is required to prevent

and/or delay failures in equipment, facilities and systems.

PM includes inspection, checkout, adjustment, lubrication, cleaning, servicing,

calibration, corrosion control, leak check, and alignment performed in accordance

with the organisation’s preventive maintenance instructions.



Corrective Maintenance

Corrective maintenance is defined as those items of work necessary to change

parts, accessories, apparatus, bearings, drive belts, chains, pulleys, sheaves,

valves, piping apparatus, strainers, filters, dryer elements and the change-out of

components such as generators, pumps, starters, motors, radiators and total

overhaul of the basic item of equipment, facility or utility system.

Corrective maintenance is performed as a result of equipment or system

breakdown, accidents or by detection of a malfunction or potential malfunction.

3.2.2 Maintenance Situation at OLP

It was reported by OLP’s technical staff during the inspection visit that the RMG

manufacturer did not provide exhaustive maintenance manuals whereas the

workshop staff is well educated and experienced and able to fulfil their tasks

accordingly in order to guarantee the equipment’s availability. It was further

reported that due to the lack of certain spare parts, some maintenance and repair

works could not be carried out as required, e.g. replacement of spreader flippers.

With respect to the worn out gantry wheels it was assumed that turning the wheels

by 180 degrees instead of replacing them was also due to a shortage of spare parts

in combination with the unsolved rail settlement problem being a root cause for

the wheel damages.

To enhance the overall operational availability and performance the maintenance

scenario should be changed form a “by use” or “failure” mode towards a

preventive maintenance scheme.

3.2.3 Maintenance Costs

In order to estimate annual maintenance costs it is assumed that the above

mentioned preventive maintenance scheme is successfully introduced. It is further

assumed that the initial purchase price per RMG was approx. € 3,000,0001 as the

expected annual maintenance costs for work force and material will be derived by

taking into account this price. In line with long-term experience the following

annual maintenance costs are estimated as listed in Table 5 below.

1 Information on purchase price has been provided by OLP.



Table 5: Equipment Maintenance Cost Estimation (per Year)

Purchase price per RMG*: € 3,000,000

Estimated annual maintenance costs (including work force and material):

6% to 8% of the RMG price

Equivalent to: € 180,000.00 to € 240,000.00 per RMG and year

Source: HPC, Nov. 2015;

Annex 1 provides a maintenance cost plan for OLP Pier 1 RMG cranes for the

upcoming 30 years.



4. SUMMARY

This section briefly summarises the results of the report including major

repair and maintenance works recommended for OLP Pier 1 RMG Cranes

and the associated costs.

In recent years, OLP Pier 1 terminal has experienced settlements in the RMG yard

which have affected operational performance and the usability of the area. As to

the RMG yard area, severe damages have been observed on the crane rails and a

visual inspection of the RMG cranes suggests that severe damages have occurred

at the gantry systems due to the rail settlements.

Recommended repair works for the RMG cranes include the change of all gantry

wheels and the change / repair of pin connections between sill beam and gantry

system where deemed necessary. Further to this, a professional wheel alignment

and measurement is recommended before re-entry into operations. Costs for these

works are estimated with 2.2 million EUR. To rehabilitate the equipment, a range

of other repair works is recommended for damages which are not directly

associated with the settlements observed. The costs for these works are estimated

at 1.4 million EUR. Hence, total repair costs for RMG cranes sum up to 3.6

million EUR.

For a sustainable rehabilitation, the repair works recommended for the RMG

cranes have to be accompanied by appropriate repair works for the RMG yard.

As to the RMG crane maintenance, costs are estimated with 180,000 to 240,000

EUR per crane per year over a 30 year time horizon, given that the suggested

maintenance works are implemented successfully.





Annex 1

ANNEX 1: MAINTENANCE COST PLAN RMG

CRANES



Maintenance Cost Plan OLP Pier 1 RMG CranesHPC Hamburg Port Consulting GmbH

Report on OLP Pier 1 RMG Cranes, December 2015

Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Project Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Maintenance Cost

RMG Cranes million EUR 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21

Year 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035

Project Year 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20


Year 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045

Project Year 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30


Documents

CONDITION ASSESSMENT, REPAIR STRATEGY AND BUDGET …€¦ · Port Authority S.A. (“OLP” or “the Client”) to understand the damage and assess the associated immediate repair