Condition Monitoring 021711 v3[1]

Condition Monitoring

Welcome!

Mark your calendar for the 2011 CP Panel Discussion Webcasts:

April 21, 2011: Asset ManagementMay 19, 2011: EmissionsJune 16, 2011: Alarm ManagementJuly 21, 2011: Dust ControlAugust 18, 2011: CFATSSeptember 22, 2011: Process SafetyOctober 20, 2011: Energy EfficiencyNovember 17, 2011: Dry Materials Handling

Today’s Webinar is sponsored by:


Traci Purdum, Senior EditorChemicalProcessing.com

Joining us today:

Renard KlubnikApplications EngineerWilcoxon Research

Michael EisenbiseGlobal Reliability Implementation Specialist BP Downstream

Andy PageIntegration DirectorGPAllied


Renard Klubnik

Applications EngineerWilcoxon Research


Vibration:The cornerstone of

condition monitoring

Renard Klubnik, Applications EngineerMeggitt Sensing Systems – Wilcoxon Research


Benefits of Vibration Monitoring

• Equipment is monitored and analyzed while it is running• Used to predict failures and schedule maintenance

during planned shut downs• High potential for return on investment

• Level of investment can be tailored to budgets and criticality

• Identifies a variety of machinery faults• Can be used on virtually all types of rotating

machinery• You don’t have to be an expert

• Some of the benefits of vibrations monitoring can be gained with vibration trending, instead of analysis


Causes of Vibration

• Mechanical defects• Bearings• Gears

• Mechanical conditions• Imbalance• Soft foot

• Electrical conditions• Stator• Rotor

• Impellers• Blades

• Resonance• Misalignment

• Winding


Effects of Vibration

• The expended energy from vibration causes wear of components, reduced performance, increased energy consumption and reduced reliability

• Vibration can excite natural frequencies causing significant vibration at the components


How to Detect Vibration

Raw signal from accelerometerA/D conversion and signal processing

Digitized waveformFFT or spectrum


Vibration Data Collection Methods

• 4-20 mA trending• Portable data collection• Online monitoring


Highly critical(online shutdown protection)

Mission critical(portable, online, or 4-20 mA)

Balance of plant(4-20 mA)

Run to failure(no monitoring)

When to Apply Vibration Monitoring


Vibration Analysis can Detect Many Common Problems

• Machine faults– Imbalance– Misalignment– Bent shaft– Mechanical looseness– Casing / foundation

distortion– Bearing faults– Motor faults– Resonance

• Machine design– Universal joints– Asymmetrical shafts,

cams– Gear mesh– Couplings– Bearings– Pumps and fans– Reciprocating machines– Motors / generators


Michael Eisenbise

Global Reliability Implementation Specialist

BP Downstream


Disclaimer

The comments made in the following presentation are solely those of the presenter.

These comments are made under the presenter’s first amendment rights.

The presenter’s comments do not necessarily reflect the thoughts, policies, opinions, etc. of BP or SMRP


History of Reliability

1940

First Generation”

•Fix it when it broke

Second Generation:

•Scheduled overhauls

•System for planning and scheduling work

•Big slow computers

Third Generation:

•Condition monitoring

•Design for reliability and maintainability

•Hazard studies

•Small, fast computers

•Failure modes and effects analysis

•Expert systems

•Multi-skilling and teamwork

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

14


5

Equipment Failures

A

B

C

D

E

F

4% 7%

2% 14%

5% 68%Con

ditio

nal P

roba

bilit

yof

Fai

lure

UAL, 1968

In the 1960’s research at United Airlines by Nolan & Heap found that failures could be grouped into 6 patterns, and they also found a prevalence of infant mortality or early failures (Pattern F)

89%


5

Equipment Failures

A

B

C

D

E

F

4% 7%

2% 14%

5% 68%Con

ditio

nal P

roba

bilit

yof

Fai

lure

UAL, 1968

In the 1960’s research at United Airlines by Nolan & Heap found that failures could be grouped into 6 patterns, and they also found a prevalence of infant mortality or early failures (Pattern F)

89%Age Related Not Age Related


“…there is often little or no relationship between how long an asset has been in service and how likely it is to fail.”

• John Moubray, Reliability Centered Maintenance II


• Avoid the Age Related Failure Thinking Trap!• Follow up studies by Bromberg (Sweden) in 1973

and the U. S. Navy in 1982 produced similar findings to the original United Airlines study.

• Only 4 – 20% components showed age related failure characteristics!

• 77- 92% component failures are random!


“…there is often little or no relationship between how long an asset has been in service and how likely it is to fail. However, although many failure modes are not age-related, most of them give some warning that they (failures) are in the process of occurring or are about to occur.”

• John Moubray, Reliability Centered Maintenance II


• Time based turn-a-rounds, outages, etc. • What does the previous data tell us?

“Let’s tell the assets what we want the assets to do, let’s avoid having the

assets telling us what they want us to do.” Michael Eisenbise


Predictive MaintenancePotential Failure P-F Curve

Con

ditio

n

Time

Point where failure can first be detectedP

Point of Functional

FailureFPoint where failure starts

Catastrophic Failure

P – F Interval

21


For a predictive/conditioning maintenance task to be effective

• Failures must be detected in the P-F interval and an action taken to prevent the failure.

• The predictive maintenance activity must be cost effective

• The sooner the failure is predicted, the optimal failure point can be determined

• The sooner the failure is predicted, the better the planning and scheduling can be to maximize availability of the asset.

22


Total Cost Concept – Optimizing PM/PdM Frequency

Tota

l Cos

t

LowestTotal Cost

23


Implement Strategies to Mitigate Consequences of Failures-Assign Tasks

• Predictive Maintenance (PdM)/Conditioned Monitoring Tasks

• Preventive Maintenance (PM) aka time or interval based tasks

• Failure Finding Tasks, Intended to find hidden failures e.g. burned out light bulb, often called functional test.

• Redesign• Run to Failure (RTF), RTF is an acceptable

maintenance strategy were applicable e.g. water fountain. RTF is not related to equipment criticality


Andy PageIntegration DirectorGPAllied



Source: Brynjolfsson (MIT), Wireman, Troyer, Allied

Technology Maturity

Bus

ines

s P

roce

ss a

nd

Cul

ture

Mat

urity

+27%• Improved Bottom Line Performance

• Lack of System Support

High

Low

Low

+75%• Significantly

Improved Bottom Line Performance

• Practices and Systems Aligned

Baseline •Informal

• Manual Planning Processes

• Below Average Business Performance

-7%• Systems are not

Complemented by Effective Business Processes

• Significant Inefficiencies

High


OE

E (%

of B

ase)

Source: The RM Group, Knoxville, TN

15 35 55 75 9598

100102104106108110112114


Note: John Schultz to be featured in Ron Moore’s new book What Tool? When? Selecting the Right Manufacturing Improvement Strategies and Tools

Source: 1997 Benchmarking Study, John Schultz


Source: John Schultz, RM Group

Equipment on PM (%)Source: 1997 Benchmarking Study in Chemical Processing industry, John Schultz to be featured in Ron Moore’s new book What Tool? When? Selecting the Right Manufacturing Improvement Strategies and Tools

Mai

nten

ance

Cos

ts ($

)% R

AV



Coverage by Technology

001350000220Existing Coverage

3,2605013445885883,2603696804th Quartile

3,8621,4637178828823,8621,0771,5303rd Quartile

4,3642,2981,0901,1761,1764,3641,6932,3122nd Quartile

4,8152,9251,4921,4701,4704,8152,1552,7201st Quartile

5,0164,1792,8692,9392,9395,0163,0783,400100% Theoretical

Mech – MechanicalUE – Ultrasound IR – Infrared ThermographyElect – Electrical MCA – Motor Circuit Analysis

Elect UE

Mech IR

Oil Analysis

MCA Online

MCA Offline

ElectIR

Mech UEVibration

Source: John Schultz


PM Task ActionRecommendation # of Tasks % of Tasks Man-Hours

RepresentedNon-Value Added (Delete) 1,640 8.2% 6,661

Reassign to Operator Care 1,380 6.9% 5,605

Reassign to LubeRoute 2,856 14.3% 11,600

Replace with PdM 6,437 32.2% 28,222

Re-Engineer 5,200 26.0% 26,221No ModificationsRequired 2,487 10.4% 8,987

Totals 20,000 100.0% 87,297

Source: Allied assessment at a Steel Mill



Walkdown Tool

Asset Health Matrix Tool/RCM Blitz™

OP-1 & OP-2 Standards

Criticality Analysis Tool

TEAM

Meets Minimum Standard

Asset Catalog

Criticality Analysis

Failure Modes Analysis

Corporate Standards

Maturity Spider





Cannot Report Asset Health

Asset Health Report

PM/PdM BP Tool

Y

N N N N N

Y Y Y Y




NOT ENGAGED

Level Two

Level Three

Level Four

Level Five

EXPERI-MENTING

ENLIGHT-ENED

GOOD PRACTICE

12

34

5

BEST PRACTICE

TIME

PROGRAM MATURITY

and DISCIPLINE


Questions for our Panel?

Webinar Sponsored by:

Andy PageIntegration [email protected]

Renard KlubnikApplications EngineerWilcoxon [email protected]

Michael EisenbiseGlobal Reliability Implementation Specialist BP [email protected]


Thank you for attending today’s Webinar!

Look for an email from us with a link to download the entire Presentation from today’s event.

Download the 2011 CP Panel Discussion Webinars at:www.ChemicalProcessing.com/cpseries

Documents

Condition Monitoring 021711 v3[1]