Bluescope Port Kembla: Performance Improvement

of an Extreme Axle Load Industrial Railway

Anthony Gibson Bluescope

John Gullick

Fluor

Bluescope

• Bluescope Steel Ltd has evolved from the 3 Australian steel industry pioneers – BHP, John Lysaght & Australian Iron & Steel.

• Bluescope Steel emerged following the spin out of BHP Steel in 2002 and its name changed in 2003.

• Bluescope employs over 16,000 people in 17 countries and has over 100 manufacturing facilities world wide.

• Bluescope is the manufacturers of iconic steel brands such as Colorbond® and Zincalume® plus hot rolled coil, plate and slab.

Bluescope at Port Kembla • Australian Iron & Steel

established an integrated steelworks at Port Kembla, 80km south of Sydney, in 1928.

• Port Kembla was an ideal location due to its proximity to high quality coking coal and port facilities.

• Plant capacity is 5.6 million tonnes, though the plant is currently producing at 50% capacity as Bluescope focuses on meeting domestic steel demands.

Rail at Bluescope Port Kembla • Historically rail has undertaken the

majority of haulage task at Port Kembla.

• Rail has been used to:

• Haul coal from the mines to feed the coke ovens.

• Haul molten iron in torpedo ladles from the blast furnaces to the steelmaking facility (BOS).

• Haul slab from the slab caster to slab yard prior to rolling or export.

• Hauling hot rolled coil or plate to value-adding clients such as Lysaghts and other steel-based clients.

• Rail has proven to be more reliable and cost effective compared to trucks for internal haulage in the operationally vital areas.

Bluescope’s Port Kembla Rail Network

• 70 km of plain track

• 254 turnouts

• 75 level crossings

• 12 bridges

• Track speeds 25km/h down to walking pace.

• Axle loads up to 62.5T

Fluor at Bluescope • Fluor have been contracted by Bluescope at Port

Kembla since November 2001.

• Fluor are responsible for all rail infrastructure at PKSW including asset management, engineering, inspection, repair, upgrading and capital works.

• Fluor has a site team of approximately 45 to undertake this scope plus a panel of specialist sub-contractors.

• Classic benefits of the KISS principle.

Hurdles that needed to be overcome

• Extreme axle loads – Torpedo Ladles with molten iron are 500 gross tonnes (8 axles) i.e. 62.5 TAL.

• Extreme heat – pouring of molten iron at the BOS or metal dumping pits overheats the rail and results in plastic deformation and stored energy.

• Asset condition – track previously timber or steel sleepers, old 53kg/m rail, jointed.

• Old maintenance practices – passed down from generation to generation. Gaps in knowledge were increasing.

• Acceptance that derailments were unavoidable.

Major changes implemented

Bluescope • 2001: Bluescope outsourced asset

management, not just maintenance execution.

• 2007: Responsibility for rail haulage and infrastructure changed from the PKSW management team to Bluescope’s Supply Chain & Processing (i.e. logistics specialists).

• 2007 – present: Commitment to fund a “10 year plan” to rehabilitate key rail infrastructure assets.

Fluor • 2002 – present: 12 continuous years

applying asset management process and techniques.

• 2006: Development of a business risk based asset rating system to determine and justify investment strategies.

• 2008: Restriction of materials used to known, quality and standard components to eliminate “legacy” problems.

• 2009: Implementation of a wide-spread rail training program using accredited rail training organisation.

Fluor’s Asset Management Model for Rail

Areas of Improvement - Derailments

34

16

28

22

7

15

57 6

2 20 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2002/3

200

3/4

2004/5

200

5/6

2006/7

200

7/8

2008/9

20

09

/10

20

10

/11

20

11

/12

20

12

/13

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

YT

D

An

nu

al

Dera

ilm

en

ts

Total Derailments(Infrastructure Related)

Areas of Improvement – Broken Rails

2.4

1.8

2.32.1 1.9

1.51.08 1.08

0.250.50

0 00.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Broken Rails

Broken Rails/mth Log. (Broken Rails/mth)

Areas of Improvement – Ultrasonic Rail Defects

147

46

127

5438

20

5126

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Ultrasonic Rail Defects

Areas of Improvement – General Defects

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

No

. of

Fau

lts

Asset Type

Signal Emergency Maintenance Trends

Level Crossings

Points Motors

Points Indication

Pedestrian Crossings

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

No

. of

Fau

lts

Fault Type

Tangent Track Emergency Maintenance

Broken Fish Plate

Gauge

Broken Rail

Miss aligned jointMissing/Defective Bolts

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Num

ber o

f Fau

lts

Turnout Fault trends

Top 7

Expon. (Top 7)

Areas 0f Improvement - Efficiency

Workforce Reduction Cost Reduction

100% 97% 97% 97% 91% 86%77%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Wages Workforce

100%87% 92% 90% 84% 82% 79%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Routine Maintenance Cost Improvement

Conclusion

• Improvement in performance of Bluescope’s rail network is evidence of the effectiveness of:

• Business focussed Asset Management Planning

• Consistency of investment in the logistics chain

• Targeted investment based on business risk

• Simplification of components

• Improvement in maintenance team knowledge and application

• That is, do what you say you will do and stick to it.