Not every lubrication point requires the same level of attention.
A bearing on a critical production asset may require tighter control, more frequent verification and higher technician competency than a non-critical auxiliary machine. Treating every lubrication point in exactly the same way can waste resources on low-risk equipment while leaving critical assets insufficiently protected.
This is why a structured criticality tiering system is useful.
Within a Lubrication Reliability™ Strategy, Lubretec uses three practical levels:
The purpose is simple:
The higher the consequence of lubrication-related failure, the greater the level of control, competency and monitoring required.
Tier A assets are the most critical lubrication points in the plant.
A lubrication failure could result in serious consequences such as:
These assets deserve the highest level of lubrication control.
Tier A assets should normally have:
For Tier A assets, lubrication should not depend on memory, individual experience or informal practices.
The current Lubretec Organisation & Planning framework identifies Level 3 competency as appropriate for Tier A assets and condition-based decision-making.
In simple terms:
Tier A = Failure is unacceptable or has major consequences.
Tier B assets are important to the operation, but their failure has a lower consequence than a Tier A asset.
A lubrication failure may cause:
The equipment still requires a controlled lubrication programme, but the level of monitoring and verification can be proportionate to the risk.
Tier B assets should normally have:
For Tier B equipment, the Lubretec framework identifies Level 2 – Signed Off competency: the technician should independently demonstrate the complete task to a supervisor, including contamination-control steps.
In simple terms:
Tier B = Failure matters and needs controlled prevention.
Tier C assets are lower-criticality lubrication points.
A lubrication failure may still cause wear, reduced equipment life or maintenance costs, but the overall consequence is relatively limited.
Examples may include:
Tier C does not mean that lubrication is unimportant.
It means that the lubrication strategy can be proportionate to the risk.
Tier C assets may use:
The Lubretec framework identifies Level 1 – Task-Trained competency as sufficient for Tier C assets and routine top-ups.
In simple terms:
Tier C = Routine control is appropriate.
| Tier A | Tier B | Tier C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Criticality | Critical | Important | Routine |
| Failure consequence | Very high | Moderate/high | Low |
| Lubrication control | Highest | Controlled | Standard |
| Technician competency | Level 3 – Certified | Level 2 – Signed Off | Level 1 – Task-Trained |
| Route completion | 100% target | Controlled | Routine |
| Condition monitoring | Strongly considered | Consider where justified | Usually not required |
| Verification | High | Moderate | Standard |
| Management attention | Highest | Regular | Routine |
The exact thresholds should always be adapted to the organisation, equipment and risk profile. Tiering is a decision-making framework, not a universal classification standard.
Criticality should be based on the consequences of failure, not simply on the size, cost or age of the machine.
Consider questions such as:
Would the failure stop production, reduce capacity or have little operational impact?
If another machine can immediately perform the same function, the consequence may be lower.
Long lead times, specialist labour or difficult access can increase criticality.
A lubrication-related failure that could create a safety hazard should receive a high level of attention.
Leaks, spills or failures involving environmentally sensitive equipment can increase criticality.
Consider lost production, repair costs, spare parts and consequential damage — not simply the value of the lubricated component.
Criticality tiering should not be a label that exists only in an asset database.
It should influence how the asset is lubricated and managed.
For example:
Tier A
Tighter control → higher competency → stronger verification → condition monitoring where appropriate
Tier B
Controlled execution → verified competency → appropriate monitoring
Tier C
Standardised execution → routine competency → proportionate monitoring
This is the key benefit of tiering:
Resources are directed towards the lubrication points where they provide the greatest reliability benefit.
A common mistake is to assume that a Tier A asset should automatically be lubricated more frequently.
That is not necessarily correct.
Criticality determines the consequence of failure. It does not by itself determine the correct lubrication interval.
The lubrication frequency should still be established using factors such as:
Lubretec's Organisation & Planning framework recommends time-based intervals as the baseline and moving towards condition-based triggers where reliable condition-monitoring data is available.
Therefore:
Criticality tells you how much control is required. Condition and engineering data help determine when lubrication is required.
Criticality tiering should also influence who is permitted to perform the work.
Assigning a technician to a lubrication task is not the same as confirming that the technician is competent to perform it correctly.
For example:
This creates a direct link between asset criticality, task competence and lubrication reliability.
A Tier A machine is not necessarily a "better" machine than a Tier C machine.
The tier simply reflects the risk and consequence associated with lubrication failure.
This distinction is important because the objective is not to make as many assets as possible Tier A.
If everything is classified as critical, nothing is truly prioritised.
A useful tiering system creates differentiation:
Not everything needs maximum control. Critical equipment does.
Within a Lubrication Reliability™ Strategy, criticality tiering helps organisations move from a one-size-fits-all lubrication programme towards a risk-based approach.
Instead of asking:
"How do we lubricate every machine?"
the organisation can ask:
"Which assets require the greatest level of lubrication control, and what level of control is appropriate for each?"
That shift helps align planning, competency, monitoring, routes, KPIs and resources with actual business risk.
Tier A – Critical
Highest consequence → highest level of lubrication control.
Tier B – Important
Significant consequence → controlled and verified lubrication.
Tier C – Routine
Lower consequence → standardised, proportionate lubrication.
The goal is not simply to classify assets.
The goal is to prioritise lubrication reliability where it matters most.
Right level of control. Right level of competence. Right level of attention — based on risk.