Bad Projects continue with Bad Space Utilization
We cannot always place a project in a fresh new location, but when we can, we should. I have seen "rebuilds" that essentially involved tearing out an entire paper machine and replacing it in the same space as occupied previously.
If your project involves rebuilding a machine in an expanding paper or paperboard grade (and please tell me why you would do a project that did not meet this basic criterion), consider this. First build a new machine in a new building envelope next to or near the adjacent machine. This will make this project much easier, allow it to be built on a more reasonable schedule, and will not stress your service to your existing customers. Then, if you are in an over-supply condition upon project completion, you can afford the downtime to rebuild the existing machine.
This path should be followed even if changing grades. Taking machines out of old buildings to replace them with machines in new grades has also been done--and is also complete foolishness. By the time the building is renovated, the costs are higher than for a new, separate building. Not only that, the renovated building is a compromise at best, a compromise that will cause the operations to suffer from that day forward.
I once saw an off-machine coater installed in the path of a future paper machine on a certain site. It was placed there because there was no space at the end of the existing machine. All well and good--except that this new coater was designed to be the same width as the old paper machine--a width that was already obsolete in its given grades. So now the site has a new coater, in line with where a new machine would fit in front of it, but of an obsolete width.
That mill is currently and permanently shut down.
Engineering Manager of the Year, call for nominations
We are looking for an individual who has done an extraordinary project, one that almost defies belief. Its extraordinary features can be schedule, technology, cost or all three.
We have often gotten nominees that go something like this, "I nominate Joe because he has done a great job of running our engineering department for the last fifteen years." Quite frankly, we are not interested in such nominees.
However, if you know someone who has led a very exceptional project in the recent past (the last two or three years), we want to know about it. We want to honor them and hold them up as an example for Engineering Managers in every pulp and paper mill around the world.
Just send your nomination, with as much details as you can provide, to [email protected]. We will seriously consider it.
|
________
Current Patent Activity is available here.
|
|
________
Capital Arguments Engineering Manager of the Year
Hall of Fame
Since its inception, Capital Arguments has believed extraordinary projects are possible. They can be done safely, responsibly and offer a great advantage to their mills with lower capital costs and saved downtime. We established this award in 2008 to recognize those people and companies that follow this philosophy. This award is given once per year somewhere in the world. We honor our inductees permanently here.
________Mac Switkowski--Engineering Manager of the Year 2015
Mac Switkowski, center, holds his Capital Arguments Engineering Manager of the Year Award that was presented by Paperitalo CEO Jim Thompson, left, as Luis Henao, right, vice president at Pratt Industries applauds. Mac brought the new mill at Valparaiso in on time and on budget despite a change of paper machine suppliers mid project.
________
Not Awarded 2014
You have to be really good to get this award. We did not receive any qualifying nominations in 2014.
________ Not Awarded 2013
You have to be really good to get this award. We did not receive any qualifying nominations in 2013.________ Not Awarded 2012
You have to be really good to get this award. We did not receive any qualifying nominations in 2012.
________
Ed Kersey--Engineering Manager of the Year 2011
Jim presents Ed with the Engineering Manager of the Year for 2011. (L - R) Matt Nilsen, Jim Thompson, Ed Kersey and Wayne South. Nilsen is Account Manager and South is Business Development Manager for Kadant Black Clawson, underwriter of this year's award. Ed Managed the construction of the Pratt Industries mill in Shreveport, Louisiana which took 13 months from piling to paper on the reel. His reward? They made him mill manager!
Kadant Black Clawson was a major sponsor of the 2011 Award. Here, on the left, Peter Flynn, President of Kadant Black Clawson, receives the company's duplicate of Ed's Award from Steve Roush, Publisher and Editor, Paperitalo Publications.
________
Not Awarded 2010
You have to be really good to get this award. We did not receive any qualifying nominations in 2010.
________
Dean Abrams--Engineering Manager of the Year 2009
Now retired, Dean was an engineer at Corrugated Services, Forney, Texas, USA in the summer of 2009 when he completed his award winning project. Dean managed a team that installed a secondary headbox in 11 hours, 30 minutes, paper-to-paper. The experts had said it would take at least 3 days. In April 2010, we presented the award to Dean in the presence of a number of his colleagues.
 Here is the award we presented to Dean:
Mike Ahcan--Engineering Manager of the Year 2008
Mike works at the UPM Blandin Mill in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, USA. In 2008, the mill's sole effluent pipe, running outside a building, almost in the Mississippi River, was determined to be in a state of imminent collapse. The experts said it would take a week of total mill downtime to replace it. Additionally, there was a danger of leakage into the river. Mike and his team went to work and replaced the pipe without any downtime and with no spillage. We had a banquet in Grand Rapids for him in July 2009.
And here is Mike's award:
We normally accept nominations in the November-December time frame. They can be sent to [email protected] with "EMOY Nomination" in the subject line.
|
|
