Shortcuts and innovation, the differences in refractories.
Typically shortcuts and poor quality goes hand in hand. The general perception of someone that took a shortcut or, the easy way out, could simply be perceived as them being lazy or as having the – I don’t really care – complacency kind of attitude. It relates to a poor mindset and often even utter disregard towards an objective. I am truly only interested in the alternatives and not going into the psychology of it here.
Even though the general perception of taking shortcuts is that it can be detrimental, I want to review the good, the necessary and the bad shortcuts, I mean a coin ultimately has 3 sides.
There are two ways to look at taking shortcuts as far as I can tell; one is – doing something without consideration, pride or care that results in poor workmanship, and the other is – doing work by innovative means.
Deadlines:
Clients are schedule and cost orientated, the result – more often than not is a degree of pressure funneled toward the contractor/business partner. Pressure is the perfect catalyst to find unique loopholes and potentially compromise integrity.
Some clients prioritize quality, not to say “take your time and neglect completion dates” – but they plan in a manner that considers the finer detail related to the time that a quality application may take. One would imagine this to be the norm, but it is not! I worked on a 6 in line where planning estimated each brick to take 30 seconds to install! As a result, a few thousand bricks multiplied by 30 seconds each, was allowed for on the schedule. Not considering cuts, leveling, and in this case tying in old to new bricks. Any contractor would feel obligated to find shortcuts in this scenario! I won’t go into refusing the schedule in this story however yes that should be step 1.
Some clients have an understanding that poor quality could leave them to answer for unplanned outages & failures. So, they start at the start, thus including the installation team in the planning phase as opposed to relying on a desk jokey without experience to tell us when we will be done.
Procrastination:
Taking shortcuts as a result of pro-cras-ti-na-tion can mean a considerable degree of innovative thinking thanks to the sudden or immediate need for a result. There happens to be a great TED talk on how procrastinators tend to be the best creative thinkers considering they (or we, if you like) have to think under unique circumstances, often coming to impressive conclusions. All said – Forced shortcuts could be applied to the deadline and procrastination argument for a variety of reasons.
Habits:
There is a difference between “habits and automated actions” for the sake of this article I will avoid the detail. I’ve written about this specific subject and should publish it on a different platform soon.
I must however say that an automated action is simply an unconscious event, something that does not require you to think in detail… brushing your teeth, driving your car, placing the 500th brick for the day. You know there are certain things you have to do, and it goes without saying… Put toothpaste on the brush – duh! Start the car! Mortar that brick, keep joints tight … In contrast I perceive building a good habit as an opportunity for innovation and here’s how.
Let’s use this example: Mixing 10 tons a day with a pan mixer for a few shifts.
One must identify the best way to do the job and see where to save time during the repetitive process. Get into the habit of checking or knowing each addition of water is correct. How long it must be mixed for – and how long it has been mixing while you were occupied elsewhere. When to clean the mixer and buckets. When to get clean water and know there is enough. How long it takes to get it there if it’s not enough for your shift. How and when more material gets dropped off. Where does empty bags go etc.… It sounds simple and easy enough but the point I am making is that one would eventually be able to identify where you can save time, and ultimately automize the system. As a result, finding shortcuts to avoid a potential cascading knock-on effect because the installers are waiting for your mix.
Technology:
Technological advances should imply that things can be done faster or more accurately without adding compromise.
In my view some opportunities to take innovative shortcuts involving tech are often missed. Stud welding, curing accelerators, material that does not require dry outs. Using PP fibres in dense material that allows for faster, saver dry outs. Drones, remote cameras, rope access, you name it – all of these and more introduce some form of a shortcut without over analysis – because I know everything has a consequence. It could however mean things get done faster, often with tremendous accuracy and efficiency.
I have a personal uneasiness when it comes to automated brick laying hoists, exoskeletons for intelligent repairs and automated shot-concreting. Shortcuts for the benefit of our safety does not keep me awake at night but it makes me aware that in a few years we may just be replaced with artificial intelligence, and it may just be justified by safety – avoiding potential fatalities, injuries, hazards and risks. Replacing the human factor is very unlikely I know, because for one reason I guess algorithms won’t be able to identify good shortcuts or any at all.
Technical implications:
One must consider that there will almost always be technical implications of a poorly executed shortcut, not innovation – a pure blatant negative intention shortcut! One can perhaps relate it to a lack of understanding. Or as in certain cases it’s just a lack of interest and simple laziness – but however we look at it, it could potentially influence aspects such as a refractory materials characteristic – or a linings performance in specific environments:
Say for example you add more water than required to a castable, thus taking a shortcut to get the material to flow the way you would like it to, without too much effort – and to “make sure” it fills all the gaps. You know – get into all the little spaces. Well, the result is that this shortcut removed the “effort” of installation, but it has a knock-on effect. The results of a shortcuts like this are often only experienced much later considering reduced refractory strength, increased shrinkage, aggregate & binder segregation … and this was just assuming we used potable water. In the event the shortcut was to use the nearest water point whether it be a fire hydrant or utility water, we can start looking at incorrect PH, conductivity and suspended solids – all potentially influencing flow and setting times.
Imagine this short cut: You have to heat up the water on a cold winter morning, so you decide stuff’ it I’m using the steam line! Connect a hose and there we go! The water is warming up beautifully, but it is contaminated with the rusty gunk and oil that collected in that steam line.
Conflicting professional opinions:
Imagine a scenario where a critical refractory lining is in question. The contractor suggests gunning the lining and the advisor says it should be cast. The client is in the middle …
Reasons for casting includes a sound uniformly installed lining removing the risks related to potentially questionable gunning with alternating nozzlemen over various shifts resulting in – inconsistencies in densities & water addition, rebound loss & inclusions, possible cavities & laminations. While casting offers a uniform lining with reduced potential for inconsistencies and failures within the lining. Casting naturally takes significantly longer and in this scenario the contractor will not necessarily perceive gunning to be a shortcut because he has faith in himself, his nozzle men and the team in general … who wouldn’t.
It may in fact be seen that casting is the total opposite of a shortcut. PULLING THE JOB with formwork & added labor. The argument is tremendously open ended and could go either way – so for the sake of the point I am making this scenario applies. The range of variables makes this a story to conclude on its own, but the point is, should we gun – or should we cast – does gunning qualify as a short cut or does either qualify as good enough. Yes, it’s an open-ended discussion which I will leave there because we can debate it for some time.
Sometimes shortcut repairs are not optional. Is it a bad thing when you sieve out large aggregate to get fines to seal something when you are all out of the actual material? Or cutting bricks to size that was meant for another unit when it’s an emergency. Perhaps you have to cast shapes for dry-out; this can take 3 days in total as opposed to 3 weeks from a supplier… Taking shortcuts are obviously necessary from time to time, and it may not even be considered a shortcut!
The Objective:
The main objective is to increase the linings life at reduced cost by developing the broad scope of application techniques. So, even though it may often be perceived that a shortcut is to get something done faster it has in fact become the natural way of doing things considering that we are constantly looking for – and finding innovative ways to get units back online sooner and let them have productive operational runs for longer.
Getting things done is priority… I guess the adage “time is money” applies and taking a shortcut to get things done faster could help, if technology and innovation is applied, with a degree of technical understanding and specialized knowledge.
The proper shortcuts can lead to huge cost savings exceeding the investment for the refractory material and installation. There is a “but” though. Do it by taking serious unconsidered, uninformed decisions and it can cause foot to meet bottom.
Written by:
Barnie Enslin
Api936 #43527
Level 3 thermograper
ISO9001
