Ömür Karataş emphasizes the importance of proactive maintenance to avoid unexpected ship failures and costly repairs.
B. Eng. Ömür Karataş, General Manager, ORTECH MARINE A.Ş
While it is claimed that the risk of failure for ships during navigation is an unavoidable situation, I know many ships that have completed their economic lifespan without breaking down. Shipowners and operators keep reserve funds for potential failure situations. They wait and see when the ship will break down once it sets sail, just in case something happens.
When the critical spare parts stored on ships are insufficient for the repair of a failure, ship operators begin searching for emergency spare parts. If they cannot find them, they pay for second-hand dismantled materials or the cost of original spare parts. They want the failure to be resolved as soon as possible so that the economic activity of the ship can continue. When they manage to repair failures they thought were unexpected by hastily finding spare parts and repair teams, they boast about the comfort they feel when a large amount of foreign currency they paid in cash leaves their hands. If necessary, they think they will make up for the lost time and money once the ship starts sailing.
The chemical tanker fleet that I took over had reported an overheating issue with one of its main engines at the port of Dunkirk, France, before joining a charter contract in the Caribbean, having completed its special survey and dry-docking process.
To avoid any delays, I sent the ship's inspector to investigate the issue in detail and resolve it. When the ship departed from the port, they reported that the issue had been resolved and the coolers had been cleaned.
The ship reported the same issue again in the Canary Islands. I sent the inspector again. They informed me that they had cleaned the air coolers and resolved the issue. The ship arrived at the port in the Caribbean, but the chartering process could not be initiated due to the low performance of one of the main engines.
Every day, operations were being carried out on the main engine cooling system; coolers were dismantled multiple times, and intercoolers were cleaned, yet the overheating issue could not be resolved.
It was unacceptable to send the ship for charter with this issue, but there was nothing to be done. I went to the ship to understand the problem on-site; I went to the Dominican port. To understand the situation, I held a meeting with the captain and the chief engineer and asked a lot of questions. They expressed that they had not overlooked any details, saying, 'We did everything! We checked that! We cleaned this!'
'Okay, then let's go down to the engine room and start the problematic main engine to see what happens,' I said.
When they started the seawater pumps to cool the engine, I noticed that the pump outlet pressure was at 5 bar.
When I asked if the valve was closed or if the cooler was clogged, they showed me photos proving that the valves were open and the coolers had just been cleaned. I asked if the pressure gauge was faulty.
When I had the pump turned off, the pressure dropped to zero. When it was turned on, the pressure appeared to be 5 bar. I said that even if the pressure gauge was faulty, it shouldn't behave like this. I went up to the bulwark and observed the seawater discharge; since the ship was empty, I watched the water's surface exit. There were no signs or movements of water discharge or bubbles on the sea.
I took the chief engineer with me. I asked about all the valves on the seawater cooling circuit, and when they said they had opened and cleaned all of them, I pointed to the seawater discharge valve and asked if they had opened it. They laughed and said, 'How can we open it? The sea discharge valve! The ship would take in water!'
In my assessment, the seawater discharge valve was either clogged or closed. Because there was no seawater flow, the main engine coolers could not be cooled, which caused overheating. The main engine quickly burned the exhaust valve, and coolers were being dismantled unnecessarily, and valves were being replaced. However, since the main engine could not be cooled, its performance could not be improved.
To remove the seawater discharge valve, I had it closed with the help of a diver and opened the valve. It was observed that the disk of the bulwark valve had broken off, blocking the seawater discharge pipe, thus preventing the seawater from exiting. After replacing it with a new bulwark valve, when the seawater pump was started, the previously faulty seawater pressure gauge showed 1.5 bar, and it was seen that the main engine coolers and intercoolers were cooled, allowing us to proceed with the main engine.
It was observed that the main engine did not overheat and its performance increased, and I had the ship prepared for charter the next day.
When the maintenance of the bulwark valves, which must be performed during the ship's special survey, is overlooked, the problems encountered lead to costly practices that result in charter and service losses, which could have been avoided if understood before they occurred.
Considering that the lost charter times are between 15,000-25,000 USD/day, ship operators will be better at calculating the cost of trying to repair ships in case of failure.
Instead of thinking about repairing ships, establishing systems that will ensure proper and timely maintenance of ships or purchasing intermittent or full-time support from professionally experienced companies will be much cheaper than the costs of repairs and spare parts. Since there will be no time loss and rental loss costs, and since the ship will not lose its performance, it will maintain its priority position in the freight market.
In ship management companies, inspectors and technical directors who oversee the management and running costs of ships prefer to keep spare parts on board for easy repair in case of any failure and to have them repaired by trusted repair companies, overlooking the control costs that will affect the cost of the ship.
When I operated a 900 TEU container ship for three years, I did not find it necessary to plan for the purchase of extra spare parts for the ship aside from its critical spare parts.
Under my management, the ship worked as a feeder vessel between Italy and Malta for three years without a single day off-hire and conducted its voyages safely without being detained by PSC even once.
Six months after the ship left my management, it was detained by PSC three times, and they made spare parts purchases amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars for the ship.
Ships do not need spare parts and repairs; the greatest need of ships is to perform efficient navigation without the need for spare parts and repairs through proper and timely maintenance.
Periodic checks should be made to ensure that ships are at the correct maintenance values, and these values should be accepted by both the ship's crew and management personnel. Performance evaluations should be conducted with accurate reports supported by artificial intelligence, shared in real-time with the management office, preventing repeated mistakes during ship operations and eliminating the costs of repairs, operations, and untimely downtime.
In a digital environment supported by artificial intelligence, data is directly obtained from machines and ship equipment, validated, and performance measurements are made, with results displayed in real-time in ship offices and before ship management.
While ship personnel carry out their daily operations, spending more than half of their day in front of a computer filling out inadequate digital tracking systems and generating reports, waiting for the generated reports to be sent to the ship management office at least fifteen to twenty days later for decision-making takes about three to five months. Meanwhile, issues that could be resolved immediately grow like a virus, presenting themselves as high-cost failures.
While working in a fleet with multiple ships, the company had promised year-end bonuses to chief engineers who carried out maintenance and repair items on time without falling into overdue status to establish and expand the use of their in-house maintenance planning system.
Despite the efforts of the chief engineers, they could not avoid overdue items. One of the company's chief engineers would sit at the computer every day at 8:00 AM, ticking off all the overdue items to get the reward. This process took almost half of his day.
While the main engine was in operation, he confirmed that he was taking measurements of the piston and ring sizes. At the end of the year, when there were no overdue items, he received the reward. This way, the same chief engineer ensured he received a salary bonus as a reward.
Additionally, when I spoke with other chief engineers working in the company, they mentioned that they could not eliminate overdue items due to either a lack of spare parts or conflicts with the ship's sailing duration, indicating that planning was insufficient. However, the company's general manager continued to reward the chief engineer without overdue items based on the electronic notifications he received. Inadequate and ordinary maintenance planning and control systems increase the repair costs and lost times of ships.
The problems arising from delays in information sharing, validation, and decision-making in our current ship management systems lead to high-cost failures. When encountered, all parties, including the shipowner, develop expensive solutions by producing urgent and sudden solutions.
Unverified or inadequately validated incomplete planned tracking systems reduce the burden on ship and office personnel. The information obtained from sensors and indicators calibrated periodically will present the results regarding the ship's performance simultaneously to the ship management office and ship management as performance results.
With timely maintenance decisions created for the safe navigation of the ship, artificial intelligence-supported digital systems will ensure that there are no unexpected failures and repairs, thus ensuring navigation safety.
On ships: proper and reliable maintenance and performance systems that do not add extra burden to the personnel on board and in the office will prevent failures from announcing their arrival.
Source: SeaNews Türkiye
