Upload
fadoooll
View
66
Download
7
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Bearing life time
Citation preview
BEARING TM
With MULTIPLE DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS TM
“Everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.” AE
A new approach to rolling element bearing life estimation, and extension.
John E. JuddDynamic Measurement Consultants, [email protected]•US PATENT 6,763,312 B1
Introduction
The useful operating life of a rolling element bearing is influenced by a number of factors.Some of the factors are controlled by the designer, others are controlled the user. Bearing LIFEGUARDTM is a metrics based system for monitoring and optimizing key factors under user control.
Ockham’s Razor for PdM!
There is an ongoing need for simpler methods to assess machinery bearing condition.
This presentation describes a process developed in a three year effort to find and test a simple but effective approach to the condition assessment of rolling element bearings!
RELIABILITY
RELIABILITY –A DEFINITION The probability that a component part, equipment, or system will perform its intended function, under specified conditions of environment, and satisfactory maintenance, for a specified period of time. [Ref 9]
A SIMPLE LOOK ATBEARING LIFE ASSESSMENT: key factors!
• OUTSIDE DYNAMIC FACTORS ACT TO REDUCE BEARING LIFE.
• INTERNAL BEARING EMMISSIONS COMMUNICATE ACTUAL CONDITION AND ALLOW ESTIMATES OF PROBABLE REMAINING LIFE.
ARE YOU LISTENING?
LIFE REDUCING FORCES
HELP!
This is what the emissions from the bearing look like! All the information you need is there!
g units vs time.
Time>
Acceleration frequency spectrum.
Frequency >
BEARING LIFE-KEY FACTORS:
• Select proper bearing.• Install it properly.• Minimize lubricant contamination.• Control & Minimize the Forces that act
to shorten bearing life.• Monitor the actual condition of
bearing.
BEARING FAILURE
L10 Bearing life is defined as the number of cycles that 90 % of an apparently identical group of bearings will run before spalling defect reaches 0.01 inch2 (6mm2).
Timken specifies L10 for 90x106cycles.ISO 381 specifies for 1x106 cycles.
BEARING LIFEGUARDtm
PROVIDES:
A MEANS TO MEASURE/CONTROL:• LIFE REDUCING FORCES.• ACTUAL CONDITION OF BEARING.• LIFE EXPECTANCY BASED ON THESE
FACTORS.• ESTIMATED PROBABILITY OF NEAR
TERM FAILURE.
The DF METRIC – A measure of Dynamic Forces that Reduce life!
DF (DYNAMIC FORCES) RANGE 1-10
1-2=Optimum near L10 life.
2-4=Slightly High (Monitor)
4-7=Excessively High (Action)
7-10=Danger! (Shut down)
4.5
IF DF Over 4-Check for Imbalance, Misalignment or other low frequency problems!
The BD METRIC provides information on actual BEARING CONDITION
BD-BEARING DEGRADE RANGE 1-10
1-2= Optimum L10 life
2-4= Early degrade state
4-7 = Second Degrade State (Monitor)
7-10 = Final Degrade State (Replace)
1
IF BD EQUALS 10-PROBABILITY OF FAILURE IN 90 DAYS = 63%.
The LE METRIC Estimates effects on BEARING LIFE= C1DF + C2BD
LE -LIFE EXPECTANCY ESTIMATE 1-10
1-2= Optimum L10 life
2-4= 10 to 30% life reduction.
4-7 = 30 to 70% life reduction
7-10 =70 to 80% life reduction
4
IF LE 4-7, CHECK DF OR BD FOR PROBLEM!
IN ONE QUICK GLANCE:
• The tech knew that the machine bearing was fine but its expected life is dropping.
• DF indicates that dynamic forces are causing the reduction.
• The machine required further checking for imbalance, misalignment or other low frequency dynamic problem.
The tech needed only three numbers-and did not require:
• Frequency spectra, or data analysis. • A sophisticated expert analysis.• High level expertise in mechanical
engineering or signal processing.• The tech had enough actionable
information to make a decision!
NEWARK POWER PLANTCogen Plant - 10.5 MW 376,000 BTU/HR - Cascade Heate
474,000 LBS/HR - Steam 20,000 TONS - Refrigeration
2,200 KVA - Emergency Generator
Fig 3
Facility Power Plant
A sample TFM/PdM managers report:
SAMPLE
Main Campus
MAINTENANCE GAP= $2,200
SAMPLEMain Campus
AVOIDED COST = $22,000
MAIN CAMPUS LIFE ESTIMATE DISTRIBUTION
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
100 75 50 25 FAIL
AHUPUMPSMOTORS
L-FACTOR
MACHINES
CLICK HERE FOR MEAN TREND
ILLUSTRATION
PERCENT LIFE EXPECTANCY
144 MACHINES HAVE REDUCED BEARING LIFE!
NUMBER OF MACHINES BY LIFE FACTOR
LIFE ESTIMATE DISTRIBUTION
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1 ALERT BAD
AHUPUMPSMOTORSBAD MOTORS
BAD
1-3 3-7 7-10L-FACTOR
MACHINES
SAMPLE
NUMBER OF MACHINES BY LIFE FACTOR
MACHINE DEGRADATION FACTOR DISTRIBUTION
Things that indicate machine is in failure state
05
101520253035404550
3 10 15
AHU-SAMPLE
100
MACHINES OF SAME TYPE
GOOD- ALERT- ACTION
D-FACTOR NUMBER
D- FACTOR NUMBER[Sample]
FACILITY LIFE ESTIMATE TREND
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
JAN FEB MAR APRIL MAY JUNE
ILLUSTRATIONMEAN LIFE FACTOR TREND[100 MACHINES]
350 HORSEPOWER GAS COMPRESSORBDF Reading on shaft idler bearing =12 -Probability of
bearing failure in 90 days 63%
DEGADE FACTOR=12Detailed acceleration spectrum taken after bearing failure alert.
Top-before bearing replacement. BD =12
Lower-after replacement. BD =2
3kHz
1.4 g
BD=12 Near Failure Bearing removed from compressor.
How is that possible?Lets take a closer look.
• What are the factors that influence bearing life?
•How many of these factors does Maintenance control?
FACTORS1) ROTATIONAL SPEED
2) RATIO OF RATED LOAD/APPLIED LOA
3) ENVIRONMENT
4)BEARING MATERIAL
5) TIME AT LOAD
6) ASSEMBLY
7) LUBRICATION
Items 2,6 & 7 ?
L10 BEARING LIFE EQUATIONManufacturers rating on new bearing.
•L 10 = (K 1* a1 * a2 * a3 ) [ fa * CE /P ]10/3 (hours)
N K1 = 16667
• L 10 is estimated life of 90% of sample test bearings under specified operating conditions.
• K1, a 1, 2, 3 and fa, are manufacturer’s constants related to material, environment, reliability %. (ie-a3 = 0.2( For 99% ) and fa= number of parallel bearings.
• CE/P = ratio of rated load to actual load.• N = rotational speed in rpm
Ref: Timken Bearing Manual
IMPORTANT POINTSto note in L 10 equation:
LIFE VS BEARING LOAD• 2 X INCREASE RPM -
DECREASE BEARING LIFE factor 2• 2X INCREASE BEARING LOAD -
DECREASE BEARING LIFE factor (C/PL)3.3!• INCREASE BOTH X 2-
DECREASE BEARING LIFE factor 20!• Drop bearing load from 50 to 40% -double bearing
life!
How Bearing LifeGuard tmLE Factor Changes with Machine Speed.
DROP IN LE Life Expectancy factor VS. SPEED
0102030405060708090
1 2 31080 1800 3600 RPM
% L
10
WB,K2
BEARING FAILURE is difficult to predict!
• Years of experience has shown that bearing failure is probabilistic and very difficult to predict accurately.
• Failure data indicates that characteristics follow a Weibull probability distribution.
• The Variance on this distribution extends from < 0.5 to >15 times the mfgs. L10 life.
• It is easy to see why failure prediction is difficult!
FAILURE CHARACTERISTICS
STUDIES BY FAA, NASA AND OTHERS HAVE CONCLUDED:
‘MOST BEARING FAILURES ARE RANDOM AND ‘SCHEDULED’PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ALONE IS NOT THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE MAINTENANCE STRATEGY !
CONDITIONAL PROBABILITY OF AGE RELATED FAILURES
UAL BROMBERG U.S. NAVY
4% 3% 3%
2% 1% 17%
5% 4% 3%
A
B
C
AGE RELATED FAILURES [CONT.]
UAL BROMBERG U.S. NAVY
7% 11% 6%
14% 15% 42%
68% 66% 29%
D
E
F
REF 4
AIRCRAFT COMPONENT FAILURE CHARACTERISTICS
Fe(t) VS. OPERATING TIME
4% BATHTUB CURVE
2% CONSTANT TO EXPONENTIAL
4% LINEAR INCREASE WITH TIME
89% RANDOM FAILURES
REF: FAA STUDY MSG-1 BOEING 747
[See also Ref.4, Appendix A]
FAILURE CHARACTERISTICS Veridian Engineering- Overman.
Type A-- Bathtub Curve ( 4%)
Type B-- Constant 1/mtbf then exp. Increase (2%)
Type C-- Prob. of failure linear increase w/time (5%)
Type D-- Low prob. when new then constant (7%)
Type E-- Constant 1/mtbf [ Same old or new!] (14%)
Type F-- Exp. decrease then constant 1/MTTF [68%]
High Number of Excessively High Stress Cycles Lead to Subsurface Material Fatique.
CYCLES TO FATIQUE FAILURECARBON STEEL (0.37 QUENCHED)
Ref:Shock&Vibration Handbook 3rd Ed.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
10^4 10^5 10^6 10^7 10^8
NUMBER OF CYCLES
PER
CEN
T LI
FE E
XPEC
TAN
C
STRESS/1000psi
Cycles to Fatigue FailureCarbon Steel (quenched 0.37)
100
80
60
40
20
M
A
X
S
T
R
E
S
S
10
00
psi
10^4 10^5 10^6 10^7 10^8CYCLES(STRESS REVERSALS)
One year = 18 x 10^8 @ 3600 cpm
Two impacts per rev@ 3600 = 3.6 x10^9 /year
Ref; Shock & Vibration Handbook 3rd Ed.
L10 GENERAL FATIQUE LIFE VS LOAD
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
MinLoad
2500 lb 5000 lb 10000lb
15000lb
20000lb
Series1
•L10 Life is reduced at higher stress levels.
•GENERAL FATIGUE LIFE VS LOAD
• MIN 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000BEARING LOAD ( Lbs.)
•%100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.0001
•FATIGUE CURVE
L10 LIFE VS. DEGREE MISALIGNMENT
0
50
100
150
200
0 D 5 D 10 D 15 D 20 D
DEGREE OF MISALIGNMENT
IDEALCROWNIS = 7.7mm
SHAFT RPM VS BEARING LIFE(ANSI STD)
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
900 RPM 2500 RPM 5000 RPM 10000 RPM
EXAMPLE ONLY
SHAFT RPM VS BEARING LIFE(ANSI STD)
•TOTAL BEARING LOAD
•Rotor weight+
•Belt tension= xlbs
•Load zone force = vector sum of forces.
•Dynamic force= Imbalance + Misalignment + ImpactsImbalance =1/2 rotor mass x (2∏ RPS)2 *mass cg offset
Von Mises & Hertzian stress loads on Bearing surface
•Surface point contact stresses can reach 200,000 to 500,000 psi!Ref: Harris Rolling bearing
analysis
Sub surface fatique defects migrate to surface.
Timken exponential failure distribution
Ref: Timken Bearing Manual
WEIBULL EQUATIONS:Re(t) = Prob. of survival= e-(t-λ/θ-λ)k
Fe(t) = Prob. of failure = (1-Re(t) ) Fe(t) = 1- e-(t-λ/θ-λ)k dFe(t)/dt = f(t)= Rate of change of Fe(t)
f(t) = k θ -k t (k-1) e-(t-λ/θ-λ) for k = 1, λ= 0
= 1/θ e t/θ
Where ; k= shape dispersion factor, λ= location, θ=MTTF, t = time period
Timken Bearing uses λ = 0, k = 1.5 for L10
WHY BEARING FAILURE IS HARD TO PREDICT.
FAILURE DISTRIBUTIONS VS DISPERSION FACTOR
05
10152025303540
0.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
L10 (@ k= 1.5) LIFE MULTIPLESL10 life (1-e -(t/MTTF))^k = 0,1% failure prob.
% U
NIT
FA
ILU
RES
K= 0.5K=1.0K=1.5K=2.0
L10 TIMKEN STANDARD
MTTF(4.81 L10)
10% FAIL
63% FAIL
RELIABILITY ESTIMATE
Rs = Probability of system functioning for time t with elements connected in series:
Rs = System Reliability = e-(t-λ/θ-λ)k
Rs = P1*P2*Pn [Ex: 0.8*0.7*0.9= 0.504]
Fs = Probability of failure = 1- Rs = 0.496
How does MDA work?
• Let’s look at how DF is derived.• Let’s look at how BD is derived.• Finally, let’s look at how probability of
failure is estimated.
SOURCES OF LIFE SHORTENING DYNAMIC FORCE USED FOR DF
•Imbalance
•Misalignment
•Eccentric Shaft
•Belt Resonance
•Other sources of low frequency motion.
•High frequency impacts & resonance.ALL OF THESE CREATE STRESS REVERSALS.
They are indicated and measured as low frequency bearing housing accelerations and impact energy, adjusted per ISO standards, for flexible or rigid mounting.
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF BEARING FAULTS ?
FATIQUE PROBABLE CAUSESpalling-subsurface fatique Excessive loadPeeling -surface fatique LubricationWEARFretting /Surface Corrosion Vibration/movementAbrasion ContaminationScoring Abrasion Check SealsCorrosions SealsBrinneling/Localized Fretting VibrationSmearing Sliding friction;lubricationPitting/Fluting Electrical DischargePLASTIC FLOWBrinnelling Excessive loadDenting Excessive Point loadMaterial Failure Hard/Cold workingFRACTURE (Catastrophic) Latent Defect
Most faults cause impacting & high frequency energy!
MDA CONVERTS THESE ELEMENTS TO METRIC FACTORS
DYNAMIC FORCES
VIBRATION DATA
IMBALANCE COUPLING GEAR MISALIGNMENT WARPED SHAFT ECCENTRICITY
BELT DEFECT BELT RESONANCE
PULLEY ALIGN PULLEY BALANCE
BLADE PASS BEARING- CAGE BEARING INNER
BEARING OUTER BALL
PITTING FRETTING SCORING
SPALLING
PROCESS
FLEX/RIGID
PROCESS
DYNAMIC FORCES FACTOR
BEARING DEGRADEFACTOR
ACTION/LIFE REDUCED ALERT
OPTIMUM
NEAR FAIL ALERT OPTIMUM
INFORMATION
BEARING CONDITION
10
10
1
1
DATA INTEGRATION
US PATENT # 6,762,312 OTHER PATENTS PENDING
HOW MULTIPLE DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS WORKS?
PEAK CAPTURE
DFDYNAMIC FORCE
LE LIFEEXPECTENCY
BDBEARINGCONDITION
SPLITTER 3
2
1
4
LFD ADDER
ADDER
SIGNAL FFT
INPUT SIGNAL
PROCESSORANALYSIS
& SUMMING DISPLAY
BEARING LIFE FACTOR
•Adder
•DF [20%]
•BD [80%]
•LE [100%]
• LE A composite of DF & BD which indicates overall machine condition.
1= Optimum L10 Life10 = Minimum Life Expectancy.
•DF- A measure of dynamic forces on bearing [20-40% contribution- user selectable]
•BD- A measure of actual bearing condition. [80-60% contribution.]
LE is a forecast of the expected bearing life!
BD - DF & BEARING LIFE RELATIONSHIP- Cr/Ca [- 20%]
1 3 5 7 9
S1
0
2
4
6
8
10
EXPECTED LIFE
10 =100%
BDF-BEARING DEGRADATION
FACTOR
DYNAMIC FORCES
EXPECTED L10 BEARING LIFE
8.00-10.006.00-8.004.00-6.002.00-4.000.00-2.00
DF DYNAMIC
FORCE FACTOR1
•ASSUME RATIO OF RATED TO APPLIED FORCE DROPS BY 20% AS DF GOES FROM 1 TO 10
DF INCREASE ONLY
BD INCREASE ONLY
10
L10 LIFE
SAMPLE
10
DF max =50% reduction.
A new bearing can have low Life Expectancy! It may be affected by such factors as rotational speed and imbalance.
WHAT IS MDA BDBEARING CONDITION?
• MDA USES A COMBINATION OF POWERFUL BEARING ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
• Crest Factor, Kurtosis, High Frequency energy and Envelope Demodulation, or others.
• Each analysis technique used is based on acceleration and is converted to a 1-10 metric.
• The metrics are combined to provide BD = 1-10.• BD is then related to estimated MTTF of bearing.• BD =1, MTTF ≈L10, when BD =10, MTTF = 2160
hrs = 63% probability of failure.
ILLUSTRATION OF IMPACTS CAUSED BY BEARING DEFECTS
Courtesy: DLI instruments, WA.
MACHINERY VIBRATIONTIME WAVEFORM
Courtesy: Condition Monitoring, LLC , NJ
Peak = 0.4 in/sec
RMS = 0.17 in/sec.
CF Vel= 0.4/0.17 = 2.46 BD=4.5, LE=3.9, DF=3.9 HF=7.7 CF=14 KF=.55, ED=4.27
BRG 5, OUT, rms=2.22567
BD=11, [HF=12.7, CF=14, KF=10, ED=12.1]
0 20.0m 40.0m 60.0m 80.0m 100.0m 120.0m 140.0m 160.0m-10.0
-5.0
0
5.0
10.0
se
Re
RMS: 2.2
Live X1 X: 0.0799805 Y: 0.209865
G’s
ACTUAL TIME HISTORY SHOWING EXPONENTIAL DECAY
Peak--- rms.CF = P/rms
= 1-10K =
(P-rms)^4/rms=1-10
Courtesy of JLF Analysis, Schenectady, NY
1 2 3 4 5 6 7S1
S3
S50.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
KURTOSIS FACTOR
CREST FACTOR
G(RMS)
KURTOSIS FACTOR VS CF & G(RMS) FACTOR
12.0-14.0
10.0-12.0
8.0-10.0
6.0-8.0
4.0-6.0
2.0-4.0
0.0-2.0
K is quadratic expression sensitive to both peak value and rms g value.
SAMPLE SHOWING LOW FREQUENCY ENVELOPE
Rectified Low frequency envelope.
High frequency stripped off.
ED = rms value of envelope= 1-10
Courtesy of JLF Analysis, Schenectady, NY
BRG 5, OUT, rms=2.22567
BD=11, [HF=12.7, CF=14, KF=10, ED=12.1]
-5.0
0
5.0
10.0
Re
RMS: 2.2
Live X1 X: 0.0799805 Y: 0.209865
G’s
High frequency ring down 20kHz
Bearing impact frequency
Low frequency demodenvl.
ED = Rms value of enveloped bearing impact energy!
BD CLOSELY FOLLOWS BEARING DEFECT SEVERITY
INCREASING BDF WITH INCREASING DEFECT SEVERITY
TWELVE SKF 6205
02468
7 4 11 3 1 9 10 8 12 2 5 6
WBK2- ARR
BDF-wbk2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Vol
ts
BDF-wbk2 0.64 0.75 1 1.75 1.89 3.2 5.47 5.6 6.9 10 12.2 12.95
7REF
4ABR1
113BAL
3IN
1IN/OU
9IN2
123SCR
83SCR
10OUT2
2BALL
6ABR3
5OUT
7 REFERENCE- GOOD BEARING
4 LIGHT ABRASION/ GRINDING COMPOUND
11 LIGHT SCORING ON THREE BALLS
3 LIGHT SCORING CONDITION
1 MILD SCORING ON INNER/OUTER RACE
9 HEAVY SCORING ON INNER RACE
12 MED SCORING INNER/OUTER AND BALL
8 HEAVY SCORING ON INNER RACE/BALL
10 HEAVY SCORING ON OUTER RACE
2 HEAVY SCORING ON BALLS
6 SEVERE ABRAS- HVY GRINDING COMPOUND
5 HEAVY SCORING ON OUTER RACE
BEARING TYPE- SKF 6205
RELATION OF BD AND PROBABILITY OF FAILURE RATIO OF t/θ=1.0 USING K=1.5
FAILURE PROBABILITY VS DISPERSION FACTOR(1-e ̂t / MTTF)^k
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
RATIO t/THETA
PRO
BA
BIL
ITY
K = 1.0
K = 0.5
K=1.5
K=0.75
BDF 1-10
F(t) = (1-e –(t/θ)3/2)
Assume t/MTTF =1 when BD =10
BD =10
MTTF HAS DROPPED TO 90 DAYS (21SUBSTITUTE FOR BDF READINGS AB
PROBABILITY OF FAILURE FOR MDA-3t/MTTF (1-e -(t/mttf) 1̂.5)- MTTF
1 0.1 0.311280057 4.81*L102 0.28 1.3770865094 0.46 2.6800908716 0.64 4.0070421228 0.82 5.240971686
10 1 6.321205588 2161.18 7.224649641.36 7.952609251.54 8.520808949 PROBABILITY X
20 1.72 8.95206009622 1.9 9.271220579
PROBABILITY OF FAILURE VS. BD
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1 2 4 6 8 10BD VALUE
PRO
BA
BIL
ITY
X10
t/MTTF
FAILPROB
63.2% In 2160hrs
BRG 7, REF, rms=0.223764
0 20.0m 40.0m 60.0m 80.0m 100.0m 120.0m 140.0m 160.0m-10.0
-5.0
0
5.0
10.0
se
Re
RMS: 0.2
Live X1 X: 0.0799609 Y: 0.175307
G’s
BD=0.6, HF=0.67, CF=5, KF=0.02, ED=0.16
NEW REFERENCE BEARING
B7-REF (run135) TEST 1-25-04
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
50.0m
100.0m
150.0m
200.0m
250.0m
300.0m
350.0m
400.0m
450.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 6625 Y: 0.00297311
HFD= 0.6 CFD= 3.2
BD = 0.64HFD = 0.6CFD = 3.2KFD= 0.04EDD = 0.15
NEW REFERENCE BEARING
B4-ABR15 (137)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 2725 Y: 0.00214685
BD = 0.75HFD = 0.87CFD = 3.5KFD= 0.02EDD = 0.22
VERY LIGHT ABRASION
B11-3BALLS (run 136)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
50.0m
100.0m
150.0m
200.0m
250.0m
300.0m
350.0m
400.0m
450.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 5662.5 Y: 0.00749745
BD = 1.0HFD = 1.45CFD = 4KFD= 0.03EDD = 0.37
LIGHT SCORING ON BALLS
B3-IN (138)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 1337.5 Y: 0.027393
BD = 1.75HFD = 2.5CFD = 7KFD= .03EDD = 0.85
LIGHT/MODERATE SCORING ON BALLS
B1-IN/OUT (run 134)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 9037.5 Y: 0.101844
BD = 1.89HFD = 3.24CFD = 6.6KFD= 0.03EDD = 0.95
MILD SCORING
B9-IN2 (run 140)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 6000 Y: 0.172742
BD = 3.2HFD = 6.26CFD = 6KFD= 0.04EDD = 2.5
HEAVY SCORING ON INNER RACE
B12-3SCORE2 (run 144)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 5987.5 Y: 0.315009
BD = 5.45HFD = 8.59CFD = 14KFD= 0.6EDD = 4.2
MED SCORING ON INNER/OUTER RACE
AND BALLS.
B10-OUT2 (143)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 5875 Y: 0.264455
BD = 6.9HFD = 5.5CFD = 14KFD= 1.5EDD = 10
HEAVY SCORING ON OUTER RACE
B8-3SCORE (run 145)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 6387.5 Y: 0.307514
BD = 5.6HFD = 10.5CFD = 14KFD= 0.24EDD = 3.36
HEAVY SCORING ON INNER RACE
And BALL
BRG 12, 3SCR2, RMS = 1.40289
0 20.0m 40.0m 60.0m 80.0m 100.0m 120.0m 140.0m 160.0m-10.0
-5.0
0
5.0
10.0
se
Re
RMS: 1.4
Live X1 X: 0.0799805 Y: 1.11501
G’s
BD=6.3, HF=10, CF=14, KF=1.5, ED=5.2
B2-BALL (run 142)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 5925 Y: 0.276644
BD = 10HFD = 9.2CFD = 9.2KFD= 14EDD = 7.5
HEAVY SCORING ON BALLS
B5-OUT (run 139)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 6637.5 Y: 0.156745
BD = 12.95HFD = 13.3CFD = 14KFD= 14.2EDD = 12.95 HEAVY SCORING ON OUTER RACE
AccelerationBRG 5, OUT, rms=2.22567
BD=11, [HF=12.7, CF=14, KF=10, ED=12.1]
0 20.0m 40.0m 60.0m 80.0m 100.0m 120.0m 140.0m 160.0m-10.0
-5.0
0
5.0
10.0
se
Re
RMS: 2.2
Live X1 X: 0.0799805 Y: 0.209865
G’s
B6-ABR30 (run 146)
0 5.0K 10.0K 15.0K 20.0K0
100.0m
200.0m
300.0m
400.0m
500.0m
Hz
Ma
S1 X: 187.5 Y: 0.671253
BD=12.1, HF= 14,
CF=14, KF=14, ED=7.7
HEAVY GENERAL ABRASION
BRG 6, ABR30, rms=2.21398
0 20.0m 40.0m 60.0m 80.0m 100.0m 120.0m 140.0m 160.0m-10.0
-5.0
0
5.0
10.0
se
Re
RMS: 2.2
Live X1 X: 0.0799805 Y: 0.415329
G’S
BD=12.1, HF=14, CF=14, KF=14, ED=7.7
FAILURE PROBABILITY SAMPLE CALCULATION
• Forecast period = t = one year = 8760 hours.
• L10 = 3000 at 500 rpm, MTTF = 14430 hrs.
• R(T) = Probability of survival = exp -(t/mttf)3/2
• F(T) = Probability of new bearing failure
• = 1- R(T) = [1- exp -(8760/14,400) 3/2] ≈ 38%
• If BD indicates MTTF drops to 8760 t/θ = 1
• Probability of failure in one year. F(T)= 63%
CONCLUSION- A new way to look at bearing monitoring and fault analysis.
Bearing Lifeguard TM provides three simple metrics for maintenance technicians.
The three metrics provide information on forces acting to reduce bearing life, actual bearing condition and estimated remaining life.
Using these factors the system provides an estimated probability of failure within the next 90 days.
The system also makes available acceleration signals and demodulated envelope signals for detailed analysis if required.
BEARING TM
US PATENT #6,763,312 B1
Information in this presentation is provided for illustration of LIFEGUARD TECHNOLOGY & MDA principles only. Use for other purposes without express permission of DMC, LLC is strictly prohibited.
Reference material used in this presentation.• Shock & Vibration Handbook, Cycil Harris, 3rd Edition• Rolling Element Bearings-Tedric Harris, 3rd Edition• RCM, Condition Monitoring or both? Richard Overman,
Veridian Engineering, Maintenance Technology, Jan. 02.• NASA-Reliability Centered Maint. & Commissioning.
[Appendix A], Feb. 2002• The McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical
Terms-5th Edition.• Mil Handbook 217E• SAE JA 1011 Surface Vehicle/Aerospace Std.-Evaluation
Criteria for Reliability Centered Maintenance.• Vibra-Metrics Inc. Vibration Reference Guide.