Why a Small Number of Manageable Causes Create Most Downtime, and How to Prioritize Effectively
The Pareto principle in lubrication management
In most industrial installations, large or small, a recurring pattern is visible: a limited number of causes are often responsible for the majority of failures and downtime.
This phenomenon is known as the Pareto principle (often referred to as the 80/20 rule) and is highly relevant to lubrication management.
The exact ratio differs per plant, industry and dataset, but the underlying principle remains the same: a small number of dominant causes usually cause a disproportionately large share of failures, downtime and maintenance efforts.
By understanding which failure mechanisms have the greatest impact, you as a maintenance team can improve reliability, reduce labor hours and get closer to the ideal maintenance state where assets are running at maximum performance: the Optimum Reference State (ORS).
The Pareto principle in practice
A limited number of failure causes are usually responsible for the majority of failures.
A relatively small group of machines often accounts for a disproportionately large part of the total downtime.
These distributions are rarely exactly 80/20, but are usually so skewed that targeted prioritization is justified.
The 3 dominant, manageable causes of failures in lubricated assets
1. Contamination
Analyses of early bearing failures consistently show that contamination is a major cause of premature failure. Similar mechanisms also apply to other lubricated components, such as chains and gearboxes.
Dirt, moisture and cleaning agents can get into the contact zone and damage the lubricating film. Even microscopic particles are enough to cause abrasive wear, surface damage and accelerated fatigue.
Because contamination is an external disturbance, it requires specific preventive measures, such as effective sealing, a high level of cleanliness and controlled lubrication practices.
2. Improper or insufficient lubrication
In addition to contamination, improper lubrication is a dominant and largely controllable cause of premature failure. Industry analyses of early bearing failures show that lubrication-related causes account for approximately 40–50% of cases, depending on the application and operating conditions.
Improper lubrication — for example, due to an unsuitable lubricant, incorrect viscosity, excessive lubrication or too little lubrication — disrupts the lubrication regime. A lubricating film that is too thin leads to boundary lubrication and adhesive wear, while too high a viscosity increases friction, generates additional heat and accelerates lubricant degradation.
These malfunctions can be controlled to a large extent by the right choice of product, correct dosing and consistent execution of lubrication tasks.
3. Assembly and alignment errors
Assembly and alignment errors are less common than lubrication-related problems, but often have a disproportionate impact on component life. Small deviations in bearing alignment, shaft alignment or gear teeth increase local contact stresses, reduce effective lubricating film thickness and accelerate early failure.
Pareto perspective on controllable failure mechanisms
Collectively, contamination, lubrication-related issues, and assembly and alignment failures make up the largest group of controllable causes of failures in lubricated assets. This clustering clearly illustrates the practical relevance of Pareto thinking within maintenance and reliability engineering.
Fatigue remains an important failure mechanism, but is typically the end result of underlying problems such as insufficient lubrication, contamination or improper loading. For this reason, fatigue is primarily regarded here as a consequence, and not as a direct maintenance lever.
By focusing on the limited number of dominant and controllable failure mechanisms, maintenance teams can address a disproportionate share of reliability issues — a practical and realistic application of the Pareto principle within lubrication management.
How to identify the 20% in your factory
Recognizing the limited group of causes that cause the bulk of problems is the real power of the Pareto principle. In practice, this can be done without complex condition monitoring. Maintenance teams can take a structured approach based on:
- Analyze maintenance logs and downtime records
– Which assets fail more often than average or cause a disproportionate amount of downtime?
– Recurring problems (e.g. chains that stretch quickly, leaking gearboxes or bearings that fail too early) usually point to the critical causes. - Cluster Failure Mechanisms
– Group failures into categories: contamination, lubrication problems, assembly/alignment errors, overload, and corrosion.
– In most factories, two or three categories explain the majority of the failures. - Conduct
a baseline assessment – A structured assessment of lubrication practices, product choice and lubrication routes provides an objective picture of the risks.
– A baseline measurement quickly shows where lubrication points are lubricated too often or too little, which products are unsuitable and where the risk of contamination is greatest. - Use ILAC Pro™ to manage
priorities – Once baseline measurement is performed, ILAC Pro™ can help provide insight into which lubrication points are taking the most time, pose the greatest risk or are critical to production reliability.
| Component | Main risks | Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Bearings | Contamination and boundary lubrication | Seal integrity, condition monitoring (vibration, oil analysis), lubricants that maintain a stable film even under variable load and moisture |
| Chains | Contamination, over- or under-lubrication | Minimal Quantity Lubrication (MQL) with penetrating lubricants that do not drip and repel dirt |
| Gearboxes | Oil oxidation, leakage and particle contamination | Semi-fluid greases that prevent leakage, extend service life and reduce the need for frequent oil changes |
Why targeted lubrication pays off
The Pareto principle shows that maintenance teams do not need to do more, but smarter. Key to this is:
- Standardization and control → through tagging, routes and software such as ILAC Pro™, it becomes clear which 20% of assets deserve the highest priority.
- Precision lubrication → MicPol® technology strengthen the lubricant film and bond to surfaces, ensuring critical functions remain effective even under load, moisture and cleaning.
- Strategic maintenance → with LaaS (Lubrication as a Service), lubrication becomes a standardized process rather than a series of isolated tasks, aligned with the principles of ORS.
Structured lubrication management → in line with the principles of ICML 55.
Impact on labor time, energy and costs
With staff shortages, every hour counts. By addressing the critical causes:
the number of emergency interventions is decreasing
teams win back dozens of hours per month
more capacity will be available for planned maintenance
In addition, precision lubrication often results in 3–8% energy savings in selected drives, directly measurable in kWh and CO₂ reduction.
Conclusion
The Pareto principle makes it clear that 20% of the causes, contamination, incorrect lubrication and assembly errors, are responsible for 80% of failures in bearings, chains and gearboxes.
By focusing on these and working in line with the principles of the Optimum Reference State (ORS), maintenance teams achieve greater reliability, lower costs and more effective use of their scarce labor capacity.
Want to know where the 80/20 opportunities lie in your plant?
Contact us and book an appointment with one of our technical advisors. No obligations.
Frequently Asked Questions about the Pareto principle
That’s something we hear often. With a shortage of skilled staff, it may feel impossible to investigate where the biggest gains lie. But that’s exactly where the Pareto principle adds value: it prevents you from spending time on issues with little effect. Identifying the 20% causes is often a lot easier than expected, using failure data, maintenance logs or a baseline assessment. The result: fewer emergency interventions, lower workload and more room for planned work. It takes some attention to start, but you get time and capacity back in return.
Not sure where to begin, or would you like expert support?
Contact Interflon. Our technical advisors are happy to help, without any obligations. Whether it’s analyzing your results, giving practical recommendations or mapping the potential benefits, we are here to support you.
Finding the main causes does not have to be complicated. They are usually hidden in recurring problems: bearings failing too early, chains stretching quickly or gearboxes leaking repeatedly. Reviewing maintenance logs, failure data and oil analyses side by side quickly shows which assets demand disproportionate attention. A baseline assessment can confirm this further. The outcome: objective data to act on, instead of constantly firefighting.
The Optimum Reference State (ORS) is the ideal maintenance condition in which an asset runs as reliably and efficiently as possible. In practice, this means the right lubricant, in the right amount, applied correctly and free from contamination. Proper assembly, alignment and process control are part of it too. For maintenance teams, ORS is not theory but a practical target: everything in place, fewer failures, longer asset life and more control over time and costs.
