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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne March, 1998

CONTENTS

1.0 Abstract 2.0 Introduction 3.0 PeakVue 4.0 Case Studies 5.0 Summary 6.0 Acknowledgments

3 3 4 9 13 13

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton

Page 2 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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 90s 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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne March, 1998

DR#3 - DRAG-LOW SPEED DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD 1.8 1.6 RM S A cceleration in G-s 1.4 O VRALL= 2.95 A-DG 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Freq: 0 40 80 120 160 200 O rdr: Spec: Frequency in Hz 18.50 6.183 1.289 RMS = 2.96 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 180. RPS = 2.99 Route Spectrum 27-FEB-97 08:43 (PkVue-HP 1000 Hz)

Fig.6 A PeakVue spectrum. Bearing fault present.

DR#3 - DRAG-LOW SPEED DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD 24 21 18 RMS = 3.56 A cceleration in G-s 15 12 9 PK(+) = 22.44 6 3 0 -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 PK(-) = 2.65 CRESTF= 6.58 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 180. RPS = 2.99 Waveform Display 27-FEB-97 08:43

Revolution Number

Fig.7 A PeakVue waveform. Bearing fault present

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton

Page 8 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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 R M S A c c i n G -s R M S A c c i n G -s FAN # 2 -M1H MOTOR NDE BEARING 0.24 E E E E E E E E E E E E 0.18 0.12 0.06 0 0 A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s 20 40 60 80 100 A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s ROUTE SPECTRUM 23-SEP-97 11:26 OVRALL= .5956 A-DG RMS = .5957 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 1485. RPS = 24.75 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 020 - MOTOR FAN # 2 -M1H MOTOR NDE BEARING ANALYZE SPECTRUM E E E E E E E E 09-DEC-97 17:21 (PkVue-HP 1000 Hz) RMS = 1.54 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 1485. RPS = 24.75

Frequency in Order 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 WAVEFORM DISPLAY 23-SEP-97 11:26 RMS = .5769 PK(+) = 2.43 PK(-) = 2.39 CRESTF= 4.21 Ordr: Freq: Revolution Number 4.907 121.46

Frequency in Order 12 8 4 0 -4 0 2 4 6 8 10 WAVEFORM DISPLAY 09-DEC-97 17:21 RMS = 1.78 PK(+) = 9.74 PK(-) = 3.30 CRESTF= 5.48 Ordr: Freq: Spec: Revolution Number 4.902 121.32 .469

Spec: .00554

Fig.8 Spectrum and time waveform of an inner race fault developing.

Fig.9 PeakVue spectrum and waveform. An inner race fault clearly 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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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 120160RPM. 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 10 R M S A c c i n G -s DRAG#1 -I4 INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END Analyze Spectrum 27-FEB-97 08:42 RM S V e l oci ty i n m m /S e c 8 RMS = 11.47 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 100. 6 RPS = 1.66 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 0 0 4 A cce l e ra ti o n i n G -s 10 20 30 40 50 60 C C C C C C C C C C 010 - DRAG-LOW SPEED DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD RO UTE SPECTRUM 27-FEB-97 08:43 (PkVue-HP 1000 Hz) OVRALL= 2.95 A-DG RMS = 2.94 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 180. 70 RPS = 2.99

Frequency in O rder WAVEFORM DISPLAY 27-FEB-97 08:43 12 6 0 -6 RMS = 3.41 PK(+) = 22.44 PK(-) = 2.65 CRESTF= 6.58 Ordr: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Freq: Spec: Revolution Number 6.183 18.50 1.273

18

0 Ordr: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Freq: Spec: Frequency in O rder 3.014 5.012 .298

Fig.10 Velocity spectrum

Fig.11 PeakVue spectrum and waveform. Bearing defect well defined

010 - DRAG-LOW SPEED DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD Trend Display of RM S A cce l e ra ti o n i n G -s OVERALL VALUE Max Amp 1.28 Plot Scale 0.7

010 - DRAG-LOW SPEED DRAG#1 -I4D INTERM.SHAFT #2 DRUM END DEMOD 3.3 3.0 RM S A cce l e ra ti o n i n G -s 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.2 0.9 0.6 0.3 0 Date: 23-OCT-97 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Time: 08:10:33 Ampl: .139 0 10 20 -- Baseline -Value: .258 Date: 25-JUL-95

BEARING FAULT

NEW BEARING

09-APR-97 11:21 0

FAULTY BEARING

NEW BEARING
27-FEB-97 08:45 O rdr: 6.230 30 40 50 60 70 Freq: Sp 1: 18.65 1.281 Frequency in O rder

Days: 25-JUL-95 To 23-OCT-97

Fig.12 PeakVue trend of a bearing fault.

Fig.13 Comparison spectra: faulty and a new bearing.

Copyright@1998 Siemens Ltd - Rockhampton

Page 10 of 13

CSi Reliability Week Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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.

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

010 - HOIST-MEDIUM SPEED R M S A c c i n G -s HOIST#1 -G2 SHAFT #1 DRUM END 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 10 20 30 Frequency in Order 3 1 -1 -3 -5 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 WAVEFORM DISPLAY 28-OCT-97 12:28 RMS = .9547 PK(+) = 2.41 PK(-) = 3.72 CRESTF= 3.90 Ordr: Freq: Spec: Revolution Number 33.12 554.28 .681 0 0.5 1.0 40 50 60 A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s ROUTE SPECTRUM E 28-OCT-97 12:28 OVRALL= .9581 A-DG RMS = 4.22 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 1004. RPS = 16.74 2.4 1.8 1.2 0.6 0 0 20 C C C

010 - HOIST-MEDIUM SPEED HOIST#1 -G2D SHAFT #1 DRUM END C C C C DEMOD ROUTE SPECTRUM C 28-OCT-97 12:29 (PkVue-HP 2000 Hz) OVRALL= 3.50 A-DG RMS = 3.46 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 738. 40 60 80 100 RPS = 12.30

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

Frequency in Order WAVEFORM DISPLAY 28-OCT-97 12:29 12 6 0 -6 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 RMS = 3.37 PK(+) = 21.03 PK(-) = 2.32 CRESTF= 6.24 Ordr: Freq: Spec: Revolution Number 9.752 120.00 2.016

18

Fig.14 Velocity spectrum. No bearing faults visible.

Fig.15 PeakVue spectrum and 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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne 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 RC1M -1LD DRIVE DRUM LHS BRG HORZ 766 0.016 Trend Display of R M S A cc e l e ra ti o n i n G -s

020 - CONVEYOR PULLEY RC1M Max Amp .0043 Plot Scale 0.003 28-NOV-97 12:58 0 -1LD DRIVE DRUM LHS BRG HORZ 766

0.012

0.008

RMS Acceleration in G-s

OVERALL VALUE

NEW BEARING

FAULTY BEARING
0.004

0 Date: 28-NOV-97 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Time: 12:58:22 Ampl: .00340

20

40

60

80

100

Days: 02-DEC-96 To 28-NOV-97

Frequency in Order

07-OCT-97 11:10 Ordr: 9.758 Freq: 5.399 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 Using PeakVue to detect Machinery faults

Melbourne March, 1998

020 - REJECT CONVEYOR RR1M ROM#1 RR1M -6RD RETURN (TAIL) PULLEY RHS BRG766 0.20 Trend Display of 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 0.16 PEAK WAVEFORM 0.0024 0.0030 J J

020 - REJECT CONVEYOR RR1M ROM#1 RR1M -6RD RETURN (TAIL) PULLEY RHS BRG766 ROUTE SPECTRUM J J J J 29-AUG-97 10:24 (PkVue-HP 1000 Hz) OVRALL= .0068 A-DG RMS = .0075 0.0018 LOAD = 100.0 RPM = 23. RPS = .38 0.0012 >SKF 22213C J=BPFO : 7.73

0.12

0.08

0.04

0.0006

0 Date: 15-JAN-98 0 100 200 300 400 500 Time: 17:08:26 Ampl: .02307

0 Ordr: 0 10 20 30 Frequency in Order 40 50 60 Freq: 7.730 2.929

Days: 02-DEC-96 To 15-JAN-98

Spec: .00155

Fig.18 PeakVue Peak Waveform trend of a bearing outer race fault.

Fig.19 PeakVue Spectrum recorded 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