IMVAC 2017 International Machine Vibration Analysis Conference

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

IMVAC Middle East Featured Keynote Presentation – Dean Whittle

Fault Detection, Root Cause Analysis and Documenting Your Vibration Analysis Program

by Dean Whittle, Managing Director, Reliability Maintenance Solutions Ltd

This keynote presentation starts by discussing a case study looking at the methods, techniques and steps taken in diagnosing the problem. It then asks the question as a vibration analyst – Are we doing our job correctly? Is there more we can/should do? It also examines what we did next in respect to the case study presented. The presentation then concludes by looking at how the analysis and findings were documented and integrated into more comprehensive VA/CBM reporting metrics.

Join IMVAC in Dubai April 3-5, 2017 to hear Dean Whittle and many other great speakers, where you will benefit from their insight, experiences and leadership within the application of machine diagnostics, condition monitoring and reliability improvement.

Learn more at vibrationconference.com.

Saturday, March 11, 2017

Condition Monitoring Expert Tip #5 - Which is the Best Bearing Fault Detection Technique?

Now this is a tricky question to answer… We have a few contenders: high frequency vibration analysis, regular vibration analysis, ultrasound, oil analysis, wear particle analysis, and infrared analysis. Let's start by ruling a few of them out.

Infrared analysis is used to detect heat in a bearing, which is a late stage fault condition, so that's not your best option. Regular oil analysis can detect the presence of the wear metals within the bearing, but wear particle analysis is a better tool for that. Regular vibration analysis (i.e. velocity spectra) provide very clear indications of bearing faults, however the high-frequency detection techniques provide an earlier warning. That leaves high-frequency vibration analysis, ultrasound, and wear particle analysis.

Ultrasound is easiest to use. Push the probe against the bearing and listen carefully and you will hear if the bearing is in distress. (You can also record and analyze a waveform, but now you may as well be performing vibration analysis). Many would argue that high-frequency vibration analysis (such as enveloping, PeakVue, shock pulse, and others) provide a clearer indication of the nature and the severity of the fault. But it does require more training and potentially a more expensive system to perform the collection and analysis.

And that leaves wear particle analysis. Let's just say that if you own critical gearboxes, you absolutely must perform wear particle analysis. Performed correctly, you will detect the first signs of wear, and complex gearboxes provide a greater challenge for the vibration analyst and the ultrasound tools.

Although I haven't really answered the question, I am hoping to have put you in a position to make the right decision for your situation.

This tip is provided by Jason Tranter, Managing Director of Mobius Institute.

For more condition monitoring tips, continue to visit the IMVAC – International Machine Vibration Analysis Conference – blog every week. To learn more about IMVAC and the event nearest to you, visit vibrationconference.com.

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Condition Monitoring Expert Tip #4 - One technology is not enough

There is no doubt that technologies such as vibration analysis, oil analysis, ultrasound and infrared are very powerful. They can tell you a great deal about fault conditions in rotating machinery, electrical systems, and more. But if the criticality warrants it, you will be in a much stronger position if you have multiple technologies indicating that a fault condition exists rather than relying on just one.

For example, if vibration analysis indicates there is a problem in a gearbox, oil analysis can confirm the fault with the presence of wear particles. In the case of vibration analysis, you can utilize high frequency analysis, spectrum analysis, time waveform analysis, and phase analysis to enable you to validate your diagnosis.

There can be a great deal at stake when you make a diagnostic call on a piece of equipment. More so if it is critical equipment. At the very least, a false diagnosis may lead to equipment failure (if you miss the fault condition) or it can lead to unnecessary work and downtime. What's more, your reputation is at stake. Sadly, people often forget when you make the right call, but it can take years for people to forget when you make the wrong call.

This tip is provided by Jason Tranter, Managing Director of Mobius Institute.

Friday, February 24, 2017

Condition Monitoring Expert Tip #3 - Criticality Analysis is Critical

How do you decide which assets should be monitored? How do you decide whether you can justify the use of more than one technology? Criticality analysis provides a means to prioritize which assets will be monitored and how much effort will be put in to collecting data and performing the analysis.

Criticality analysis considers several factors. It will consider the consequences of failure, for example health and safety, harm to the environment, downtime and production losses, availability of spares, cost of spares, etc. It will also consider the reliability of the asset; how likely is it to develop a fault condition. And it should also consider the detectability of the fault conditions. Therefore, an unreliable asset where failure would lead to dire consequences and where we currently cannot detect the onset of failure absolutely requires condition monitoring and can justify multiple technologies. At the other extreme, a reliable asset’s minimal consequences of failure may not require any condition monitoring; we may employ “run to failure”.

Criticality analysis enables you to make the best use of your limited resources.

This tip is provided by Jason Tranter, Managing Director of Mobius Institute.

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Condition Monitoring Expert Tip #2 – How Often Should Measurements Be Taken?

How do you decide how often measurements should be taken?

Regardless of the condition monitoring technology, you must decide how often measurements will be taken. At one extreme, it could be a permanent monitoring system that takes measurements every split second of every day. At the other extreme, it may be infrared analysis that is performed once a year. But how do you make that decision?

The most common answer we receive is that it is based on the criticality of the equipment. More frequent measurements are taken on the more critical equipment. The next most common answer is that it is based on reliability. If you have been monitoring a machine with vibration analysis every 30 days and have not detected a fault for a year you may decide to test it every 60 days, or 90 days. Now, it is true that you have to decide how best to use your precious time. But the one factor often forgotten is the “PF interval”.

The PF interval, also known as the “lead time to failure”, is the time between when you can detect the fault condition and when the equipment will have “functionally failed” – i.e. it can no longer be used. If we use the right technologies with the correct settings and we take frequent measurements, then we will get the earliest warning, and therefore we have the greatest lead time to act. However, if the PF interval is short, then it is possible that if you have extended the measurement period to 90 days, the equipment may develop a fault and fail before you take the next measurement.

There is a lot more that could be said on this topic but suffice to say that it is essential that you understand the PF interval and continue to monitor equipment so that you take at least two measurements between the time the fault is detectable and when the asset will have functionally failed.

This tip is provided by Jason Tranter, Managing Director of Mobius Institute.

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

Condition Monitoring Expert Tip #1 – Which Technologies Should You Use?

How do you decide which condition monitoring technologies to use?

There are many condition monitoring technologies that we could employ. And within each technology there are sub-technologies. For example, within vibration analysis we can use high frequency analysis, spectrum analysis, time waveform analysis and phase analysis. Within each sub technology there are settings we must select. For example, we must set the frequency range when collecting spectra. But which technologies should we use? Which settings are correct? The best way to make those decisions is by understanding the failure modes of the equipment.

If you understand what leads to failure, and what is likely to fail, you can select the most appropriate technologies and settings. You may argue that that is an obvious statement to make. You are probably not using vibration analysis on your steam traps… But after 30 years of experience in vibration analysis, it is common to see that fault conditions a totally missed because of the misapplication the technology.

It is not necessary to perform a full RCM (reliability centered maintenance) or FMEA (failure modes effects analysis) to make this determination. A so-called “accelerated RCM” is sufficient to ensure that you make the right decisions.

This tip is provided by Jason Tranter, Managing Director of Mobius Institute.

For more condition monitoring tips, continue to visit the IMVAC – International Machine Vibration Analysis Conference – blog every week. To learn more about IMVAC and the event nearest to you, visit vibrationconference.com or call Kaitie Conly at (1) 615-216-4811 ext. 3.