CSI RELIABILITY WEEK 1998

Melbourne, Australia

18 – 20 March 1998

“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery Faults”

Prepared and Presented by:

Kris Goly
Senior Engineer – Predictive Maintenance
Siemens Ltd
Technical Services Department
CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

CONTENTS

1.0 Abstract 3

2.0 Introduction 3

3.0 PeakVue™ 4

4.0 Case Studies 9

5.0 Summary 13

6.0 Acknowledgments 13

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 2 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

1.0 Abstract

This application paper describes a relatively new and not widely yet used vibration monitoring
technique called PeakVue™. The technique was developed by CSi and is available as a standard
feature on 2120 analysers. The paper will discuss the theory behind PeakVue™, its
implementation and case histories.

2.0 Introduction
Vibration analysis techniques have successfully been employed as a machine condition diagnostic
and monitoring tool now for over forty years. At first it was the time trace analysis. Swept filters
followed and with progress in electronics, spectrum analysis finally arrived. Roughly thirty years
ago another technique was developed – High Frequency Acceleration Demodulation. However, it
was only recently that this technique became widely available and is now a standard feature on
many analysers/data collectors.

With such a wide array of tools available and with growing experience the diagnosis of a machine
condition was becoming more accurate. Analysts became more confident and more successful.
With that came recognition from industry.

In the 90’s industry has gone through a difficult time. Ever increasing competition, globalisation
of the market and economy in crisis forced companies to look at their finances. It became apparent
that the operation cost had to be reduced. One of the ways to achieve it was to decrease
expenditure on maintenance. However, it had to be done without loss of equipment availability.
Hence, industries ever increasing interest in Predictive/Proactive Maintenance. In such an
environment the vibration analysts’ role has become more important and so has risen the
expectations of good, infallible results delivered by vibration monitoring. Given the above no one
vibration technique can be neglected and every new one should at least be trialled.

Over the past 9 years Siemens Ltd has been providing Condition Monitoring Services to a variety
of industries. Using standard data collection instruments and “off the shelf” software we have been
able to successfully implement vibration programs which included machines with operational
speeds between 50 and 6000 RPM. There was however a class of machines which was difficult to
monitor and the success rate was less than satisfactory. These included all machines running
below 50 RPM.

The use of the acceleration Demodulation did help, although the technique was still not reliable
enough and the fault detection rate was lower than expected. It was especially true with gearboxes
as the filter set up was very critical on this type of equipment making it difficult to use
Demodulation during routine monitoring. Another problem with Demodulation was the
trendability or rather lack of it. Simply put, trending was not reliable enough to be meaningful.

Since the development by CSi of PeakVue™, Siemens Ltd have been using it on a variety of
equipment completely eliminating Demodulation. The technique has proven to be a very reliable
tool for detection of antifriction bearings and gear problems on machinery running as slow as 20

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 3 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

RPM. As it will be shown in this paper the implementation and analysis process is very simple and
does not require any special software or hardware.

3.0 PeakVue™

3.1 How it works?

PeakVue™ is a new methodology of processing vibration signals. The vibration signal
from an accelerometer is passed through a high or band pass filter and then the peak value
of the time waveform is captured over a defined time interval (derived by Fmax of the
spectrum and the number of waveform points). The methodology is also known as time or
pulse stretching. By convention the data is plotted as one-sided waveform, with positive
side only. After applying the FFT process a spectrum is obtained.

The peak capture process is well suited for detecting high amplitude, short duration stress
waves. The stress waves are mainly produced by faults where metal-to-metal contact
occurs. Good examples of faults producing stress waves are antifriction bearing faults, gear
defects and surprisingly electrical faults on motors.

One may ask why PeakVue™ not Demodulation and what is the difference between
PeakVue™ and Demodulation. The answer is obvious. PeakVue™ is:
• Trendable as it captures the true amplitude
• Results do not depend much on filter settings
• Can detect bearing defects on very slow machinery
• Can detect defects with gears

For very slow speed machinery the Demodulation is not suitable, as it cannot detect signals
of a very short duration. We found that while monitoring gearboxes the Demodulation
process strongly depends on filter settings and can fail to detect obvious faults. This is not
so with PeakVue™.

3.2 PeakVue™ implementation.

In order to collect vibration data using PeakVue™ technology during routine vibration
surveys a PeakVue™ measurement point has to be set up in a database. This process is
similar to setting up a “normal” vibration point. The main difference is that the data has to
be collected in acceleration units and a high pass filter has to be selected.

A Master Trend™ screen showing an example measurement point is presented in Fig. 1.

Note there is nothing extraordinary about the set up. The remainder of the set up is carried
out in Analysis Parameter Set up.

Before we start talking about Analysis Parameters set up just a short reminder what
PeakVue™ detects – it detects stress waves associated with antifriction bearing faults and
gear defects. Knowing this helps set up trend parameters and Fmax for spectrum.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 4 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

The following should be kept in mind:

• Fmax should be set up to capture faults as you normally would with routine
vibration readings
• Cover approximately 5 harmonics of BPFI
• Cover about 3.5 harmonics of gear mesh frequency
• High pass filter has to be higher or equal to spectrum Fmax

Fig. 1 Measurement point set up in Master Trend™.

For routine data collection Siemens Ltd have designed standard Analysis Parameters Sets
as follows:
• Fmax = 50 orders
• Resolution = 400 lines
• Trendable parameters:
-overall level
-5-50 orders
-waveform peak

The high pass filters are set up at 500, 1000 or 2000 Hz depending on the application. For
trending purposes the overall level and the waveform peak parameters are of the most
value as they are the most meaningful and the fault limit levels are relatively easy to
establish.
Parameter 5-50 orders was set up at the time when we did not have much experience with
PeakVue™. It is of not much value although as we do not want to “upset” the trend we left
it unchanged.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 5 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

Fig. 2 through Fig.4 shows a typical PeakVue™ AP Set up.

Fig. 2 PeakVue™ AP Set up –spectrum parameters.

Fig. 3 PeakVue™ AP Set up –signal processing parameters.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 6 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

Fig.4 PeakVue™ AP Set up – trend parameters set up.

3.3 PeakVue™ - how to analyse data.

For those accustom to spectrum analysis a PeakVue™ spectrum will look very familiar.
All the usual fault frequencies will be the same. Fig. 6 shows a typical PeakVue™
spectrum with a bearing fault present.

Things are a little different with time waveform. As it can be seen in Fig.7 the waveform is
truncated or one sided and is similar to Demodulated waveform.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 7 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

DR#3 - DRAG-LOW SPEED

DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD
1.8
Route Spectrum
1.6 27-FEB-97 08:43
(PkVue-HP 1000 Hz)
RM S A cceleration in G-s
1.4
OVRALL= 2.95 A-DG
1.2
RMS = 2.96
LOAD = 100.0
1.0
RPM = 180.
RPS = 2.99
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
Freq: 18.50
0 40 80 120 160 200
Ordr: 6.183
Frequency in Hz Spec: 1.289

Fig.6 A PeakVue™ spectrum. Bearing fault present.

DR#3 - DRAG-LOW SPEED

DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD
24
Waveform Display
21 27-FEB-97 08:43

18
RMS = 3.56
A cceleration in G-s

15 LOAD = 100.0
RPM = 180.
12 RPS = 2.99

9
PK(+) = 22.44
6 PK(-) = 2.65
CRESTF= 6.58
3

-3

-6

0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.0 3.3
Revolution Number

Fig.7 A PeakVue™ waveform. Bearing fault present

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 8 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

4.0 Case Studies

4.1 Bearing inner race fault.
We were monitoring a Toshiba 250kW 4 pole electric motor driving a mine ventilation fan
through a single stage reduction gearbox. In September 1997 there were some changes
indicating a bearing inner race fault. Fig.8 shows both spectrum and time waveform data.
Note all the peaks in the spectrum are of low amplitude. One would be hard pressed to find
the BPFI frequencies as almost all peaks are synchronous. More information is in the time
waveform. Combining both of them one could draw conclusion that an inner race fault is
developing.

020 - MOTOR 020 - MOTOR

FAN # 2 -M1H MOTOR NDE BEARING FAN # 2 -M1H MOTOR NDE BEARING

R M S A c c i n G -s
R M S A c c i n G -s

ROUTE SPECTRUM 0.6 ANALYZE SPECTRUM

0.24
E E E E E E E E E E E E 0.5 E E E E E E E E 09-DEC-97 17:21
23-SEP-97 11:26
0.18 0.4 (PkVue-HP 1000 Hz)
OVRALL= .5956 A-DG
0.3 RMS = 1.54
0.12 RMS = .5957
0.2
LOAD = 100.0 LOAD = 100.0
0.06 0.1
RPM = 1485. RPM = 1485.
0 0
RPS = 24.75 RPS = 24.75

0 20 40 60 80 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Frequency in Order Frequency in Order

A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s
A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s

12
2 WAVEFORM DISPLAY WAVEFORM DISPLAY
8
23-SEP-97 11:26 09-DEC-97 17:21
1
RMS = .5769 4 RMS = 1.78
0
PK(+) = 2.43 PK(+) = 9.74
-1
0 PK(-) = 3.30
PK(-) = 2.39
-2
CRESTF= 4.21 CRESTF= 5.48
-3 -4
Ordr: 4.907 Ordr: 4.902
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0 2 4 6 8 10
Freq: 121.46 Freq: 121.32
Revolution Number Revolution Number Spec: .469
Spec: .00554

Fig.8 Spectrum and time Fig.9 PeakVue™ spectrum and

waveform of an inner race fault waveform. An inner race fault clearly
developing. visible.

As the motor is critical for the operation of the plant during our next vibration survey we
have collected also PeakVue™ data. It enabled us to correctly identify the fault. Fig. 9
contains PeakVue™ data. An inner race fault is clearly visible. The time waveform
provided additional information on severity of the fault.

Following our recommendation the customer replaced the motor during the Christmas
break. The motor was sent for overhaul and the bearing was inspected. A crack in the inner
race was found.

One could argue that the fault could have been detected using “conventional” methods,
however by applying PeakVue™, analysis was easier and more accurate.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 9 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

4.2 Bearing fault on a variable speed gearbox-low speed.

Next example is from a variable speed gearbox. For some time now Siemens Ltd has been
involved in vibration monitoring of Draglines. Draglines are machines used to remove
overburden in open cut coal mines (sorry for explaining obvious). This case study is from a
drag gearbox intermediate shaft. The running speed of the shaft changes in a matter of
seconds from stationary to around 180 RPM. Usually vibration data is collected at 120-
160RPM.
Fig.10 shows velocity spectrum. As it can be seen no bearing faults are visible. The peaks
marked by cursor are gearmesh frequencies. For this particular application the amplitude is
not regarded to be excessive.
Fig.11 shows PeakVue™ data. The bearing defect is obvious. Based on the rate the trend
was increasing the bearing was replaced. Fig.12 represents a PeakVue™ trend and Fig.13
comparison spectra (faulty and new bearing). Note the significant change once the bearing
was replaced.
Upon inspection the outer race was found to have significant spalling and pitting in the
load zone.

010 - DRAG-LOW SPEED 010 - DRAG-LOW SPEED

DRAG#1 -I4 INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD

R M S A c c i n G -s
10 1.6
Analyze Spectrum ROUTE SPECTRUM
27-FEB-97 08:42 1.2 C C C C C C C C C C 27-FEB-97 08:43
(PkVue-HP 1000 Hz)
RM S V e l oci ty i n m m /S e c

8 0.8
RMS = 11.47 OVRALL= 2.95 A-DG
LOAD = 100.0 0.4 RMS = 2.94
RPM = 100. LOAD = 100.0
6 0
RPS = 1.66 RPM = 180.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 RPS = 2.99
Frequency in Order
A cce l e ra ti o n i n G -s

18 WAVEFORM DISPLAY
27-FEB-97 08:43
12
2 RMS = 3.41
6 PK(+) = 22.44
0 PK(-) = 2.65
CRESTF= 6.58
0 -6
Ordr: 3.014 Ordr: 6.183
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Freq: 5.012 Freq: 18.50
Frequency in Order Spec: .298 Revolution Number Spec: 1.273

Fig.10 Velocity spectrum Fig.11 PeakVue™ spectrum and

waveform. Bearing defect well defined

010 - DRAG-LOW SPEED 010 - DRAG-LOW SPEED

DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD
3.3
Trend Display
3.0 BEARING FAULT Max Amp
of
1.28 NEW BEARING
2.7 OVERALL VALUE
RM S A cce l e ra ti o n i n G -s

RM S A cce l e ra ti o n i n G -s

2.4 Plot
Scale
2.1 -- Baseline --
Value: .258 0.7
1.8
Date: 25-JUL-95
1.5 09-APR-97 11:21

1.2 0
FAULTY BEARING
0.9

0.6

0.3
NEW BEARING
0 27-FEB-97 08:45
Date: 23-OCT-97 Ordr: 6.230
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Time: 08:10:33 Freq: 18.65
Days: 25-JUL-95 To 23-OCT-97 Ampl: .139 Frequency in Order Sp 1: 1.281

Fig.12 PeakVue™ trend of a bearing Fig.13 Comparison spectra: faulty and

fault. a new bearing.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 10 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

4.3 Bearing fault on a variable speed gearbox-moderate speed.

Next example shows how valuable PeakVue™ is for “once off” vibration snap shots. Some
time ago Siemens Ltd received a phone call from one of our customers asking if we could
help them identify a problem they had with one of their Draglines. A conversation with the
maintenance superintendent revealed their cause of concern: there was a “knock” in one of
the hoist gearbox bearings. It was occurring only during change of direction of rotation. A
bearing cage defect was suspected.

“Normal” vibration data collected on this particular bearing did not detect any faults. As it
can be seen in Fig.14 there are no peaks in the spectrum, which would indicate a bearing
fault. Time waveform is considered to be normal for this particular application.

Things look different when it comes to PeakVue™ data (refer Fig.15). Spectrum contains
BPFO harmonics only so the diagnosis was simple. Waveform data provides further
information on fault severity.

010 - HOIST-MEDIUM SPEED 010 - HOIST-MEDIUM SPEED

R M S V e l i n m m /S e c

HOIST#1 -G2 SHAFT #1 DRUM END HOIST#1 -G2D SHAFT #1 DRUM END DEMOD
R M S A c c i n G -s
1.2 ROUTE SPECTRUM 2.4 ROUTE SPECTRUM
1.0 E 28-OCT-97 12:28 1.8 C C C C C C C C 28-OCT-97 12:29
0.8 OVRALL= .9581 A-DG (PkVue-HP 2000 Hz)
0.6 1.2
RMS = 4.22 OVRALL= 3.50 A-DG
0.4
LOAD = 100.0 0.6 RMS = 3.46
0.2
RPM = 1004. LOAD = 100.0
0 0
RPS = 16.74 RPM = 738.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 20 40 60 80 100 RPS = 12.30

Frequency in Order Frequency in Order

A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s

A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s

3
WAVEFORM DISPLAY 18 WAVEFORM DISPLAY
1
28-OCT-97 12:28 28-OCT-97 12:29
12
-1 RMS = .9547 RMS = 3.37
PK(+) = 2.41 6 PK(+) = 21.03
-3 PK(-) = 3.72 PK(-) = 2.32
0
CRESTF= 3.90 CRESTF= 6.24
-5 -6
Ordr: 33.12 Ordr: 9.752
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Freq: 554.28 Freq: 120.00
Revolution Number Spec: .681 Revolution Number Spec: 2.016

Fig.14 Velocity spectrum. No Fig.15 PeakVue™ spectrum and

bearing faults visible. waveform. Bearing fault clearly visible.

In this particular case the customer was very surprised to hear that there was a severe outer
race fault, not a cage defect. The bearing was replaced during the next scheduled
maintenance window. As predicted severe spalling and scoring was present in the load
zone of the outer race.

This case study proves that even if there is no historical data it is still possible, using
PeakVue™ technology, to detect bearing faults and assess its severity.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 11 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

4.4 Conveyor pulley-case#1.

Until now all the case studies presented were from relatively fast running equipment. In
most of these cases the Demodulation technique would have been probably good enough to
detect a bearing fault although it would not provide a quantitative measure of the fault
severity. The following case history is from what is considered to be very slow running
machinery – a conveyor pulley running at 33RPM.

This particular pulley was causing some problems in the past. Prediction of bearing faults
was difficult. As this is a conveyor drive drum, vibrations from the gearbox were
transmitted through the shaft to the bearing housing effectively masking any bearing faults,
which could have been present. The Demodulation technique employed did help, however
the results were still far from satisfactory.

As a result of such experience with this particular pulley Siemens Ltd has decided to try
PeakVue™. First we noticed a considerable improvement in data quality. Trends became
“trendable” and reliable. Fig.16 shows a vibration overall trend recorded on this particular
bearing. Note the change after a new bearing was installed. Fig.17 is a comparison spectra
of a new and a faulty bearing.

020 - CONVEYOR PULLEY 020 - CONVEYOR PULLEY

RC1M -1LD DRIVE DRUM LHS BRG HORZ 766 RC1M -1LD DRIVE DRUM LHS BRG HORZ 766
0.016
Trend Display
of Max Amp
OVERALL VALUE .0043 NEW BEARING
RMS Acceleration in G-s
R M S A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s

0.012
Plot
Scale

0.003
0.008
28-NOV-97 12:58
0
FAULTY BEARING
0.004

0
07-OCT-97 11:10
Date: 28-NOV-97 Ordr: 9.758
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 20 40 60 80 100
Time: 12:58:22 Freq: 5.399
Days: 02-DEC-96 To 28-NOV-97 Ampl: .00340 Frequency in Order Sp 1: .00394

Fig.16 Trend of rising bearing fault.

Fig.17 Comparison spectra: top-new
bearing; bottom-outer race fault.
As it can be seen from the above even with such slow running equipment and a “noisy”
environment it is possible to successfully detect and predict a bearing failure using the
PeakVue™ technology.

4.5 Conveyor pulley-case#2.

This case study also comes from a conveyor pulley. The shaft is rotating at 23RPM. A
PeakVue™ MP waveform trend is shown in Fig.18. Again, the trend clearly indicates
bearing deterioration. A spectrum corresponding to the maximum value of trend is shown
in Fig.19. Note the significant difference in trend once the bearing was replaced.
The bearing was inspected after replacement. As expected the outer race was damaged in
the load zone.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 12 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Melbourne
“Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults” March, 1998

020 - REJECT CONVEYOR RR1M ROM#1 020 - REJECT CONVEYOR RR1M ROM#1
RR1M -6RD RETURN (TAIL) PULLEY RHS BRG766 RR1M -6RD RETURN (TAIL) PULLEY RHS BRG766
0.20 0.0030
Trend Display ROUTE SPECTRUM
of J J J J J J 29-AUG-97 10:24
PEAK WAVEFORM (PkVue-HP 1000 Hz)
0.16 0.0024
R M S A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s

R M S A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s
OVRALL= .0068 A-DG
RMS = .0075
0.12 0.0018 LOAD = 100.0
RPM = 23.
RPS = .38
0.08 0.0012
>SKF 22213C
J=BPFO : 7.73

0.04 0.0006

0 0
Date: 15-JAN-98 Ordr: 7.730
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time: 17:08:26 Freq: 2.929
Days: 02-DEC-96 To 15-JAN-98 Ampl: .02307 Frequency in Order Spec: .00155

Fig.18 PeakVue™ Peak Waveform Fig.19 PeakVue™ Spectrum recorded

trend of a bearing outer race fault. on a bearing running at 23RPM. Outer
race fault present.

5.0 Summary
Introduced 2 years ago a new methodology, PeakVue™, of vibration signal processing has proven
to be an invaluable tool for prediction of antifriction bearing faults and gear problems. Its
application is simple and does not require special software or hardware.
A standard CSi 2120 machinery analyser and Master Trend™ software is all that is needed.

For medium and high speed machinery PeakVue™ is similar to Demodulation. For low speed it
gains an advantage as it can detect stress waves usually missed by Demodulation.

PeakVue™ data is trendable and as such is more suitable for routine condition monitoring.

The time waveform provides true amplitude making assessment of fault severity possible.

6.0 Acknowledgments
I like to express my gratitude to all Rockhampton CM Team Members whose sweat paved the
road during collection of the vibration data used in this paper.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton Page 13 of 13