Condition Monitoring Methods and Economics

A paper presented by M J . Neale and B.J. Woodley at the Symposium

of the Society of Environmental Engineers held at Imperial College,
London, September, 1 9 7 5 .
It is based on the much fuller report prepared for the Department of In
dustry in 1 9 7 5 , which has now been revised to include the latest
1 9 7 8 data and is to be published by HMSO during 1 9 7 8 for public pur
chase.
 Condition Monitoring Methods and Economics
M.J. Neale B J . Woodley

Principles and methods

As a starting point for any discussion on condition monitoring it is useful to define what is
meant by the term, and to describe how it relates to other techniques used in the operation
and maintenance of machines, such as alarm and shut down systems or methods for failure
and problem investigation.

The crudest method for operating machines is to run them until they fail, and then to try
and repair them in order to make them fit for further service. This method of operation can
be very expensive in terms of lost output and machine destruction, and in addition can in
volve hazards to personnel. It is now well recognised that, particularly in the case of large
and expensive plant, it is more economical and operationally satisfactory to carry out regular
maintenance. This involves the maintenance of the machine or its various components at re
gular intervals, to reduce the likelihood of failure during a time when the machine is re
quired to be available for use. The problem in planning this type of maintenance lies in the
choice of an appropriate maintenance interval for the machine, because the actual running
time before maintenance is really needed is not constant, but varies from one occasion to
another, due to differences in the operation of the machine in the behaviour of its compo
nents. Fig. 1 shows how the running time to failure of a typical machine would be likely to
vary if no preventive maintenance were carried out. The vertical line in this diagram repres
ents the safe time interval between preventive maintenance work which could catch all the
failures before they occurred. If this safe overhaul interval is chosen, however, there will be
many occasions when the machinery will be overhauled long before it is really necessary,
such as in those cases at the right hand side of the curve where it could have run on for
much longer without failing. This situation wastes production time, and by increasing the
frequency of maintenance operations increases the incidence of human errors on reassem
bly of the machine.

A more satisfactory compromise in terms of maintenance strategy is to carry out preventive

maintenance at what may be irregular intervals, but to determine these intervals by the ac
tual condition of the machine at the time. For such condition-based maintenance to be possi
ble, it is essential to have knowledge of the machine condition and its rate of change with
time. The main function of condition monitoring is to provide this knowledge.

There are two main methods used for condition monitoring, and these are trend monitoring
and condition checking. Trend monitoring is the continuous or regular measurement and in
terpretation of data, collected during machine operation, to indicate variations in the condi
tion of the machine or its components, in the interests of safe and economical operation.
This involves the selection of some suitable and measurable indication of machine or compo
nent deterioration, such as one of those listed in Fig.2, and the study of the trend in this
measurement with running time to indicate when deterioration is exceeding a critical rate.
The principle involved is illustrated in Fig.3, which shows the way in which such trend moni
toring can give a lead time before the deterioration reaches a level at which the machine
would have to be shut down. This lead time is one of the main advantages of using trend
monitoring rather than simple alarms or automatic shut down devices.

1
ro

average running time between breakdowns

Number - longest recorded running time before breakdown

of Breakdowns

t o t a l l y safe regular time interval between

preventive maintenance work

Running Time Until Breakdown Occurs

Fig. 1. The typical pattern of machinery failure with no Preventive Maintenance

 DETECTING CHANGES IN PERFORMANCE TRENDS
THE COMPLETE MACHINE OVERALL VIBRATION
AND NOISE LEVELS
DETECTING DEFECTS IN
THE MACHINE COMPONENTS
I
STRUCTURAL FIXED MOVING JOINTS
COMPONENTS JOINTS

SEALS PERFORMANCE CHANGES IN 1DETECTING DEBRIS

MEASUREMENT COMPONENT LOST FROM COMPONENT
SURFACES SURFACES
1 1 i1
1 1
Boroscopes Rattle/Noise Wear Power Loss Surface casts La rge Small and

Acoustic Staining debris Friction Witness indents particles dissolved

emission Fretting Noise Temperature Movement or particles

Resonance Leaks Noise clearence change

change Vibration Shock pulse Oil

Strain gauges spectra measurement analysis

Leaks
and b r i t t l e coats analysis Vibration

Crack d e t e c t i o n signal

Ultrasonics averaging
Visual inspection
Mag.flux Ferrous Non-ferrous
Noise - sonic
Penetrants chip filter
ultrasonic
detectors cY leeks
Snifting

Fig. 2. The indications of Machine or Component Deterioration

Condition checking is where a check measurement is taken with the machine running, us
ing some suitable indicator such as, again, one of those listed in Fig.2, and this is then
used as a measure o the machine condition at that time. To be effective the measurement
must be accurate and quantifiable, and there must be known limiting values which must not
be exceeded for more than a certain number of permitted further running hours. To fix
these values requires a large amount of recorded past experience for the particular type of
machine, and this makes the method less flexible than the trend monitoring, particularly if it
is required to give lead time as well as machine knowledge. It can be particularly useful,
however, in a situation where there are several similar mahines oerating together as in this
case comparative checking can be done between the machine which is monitored, and
other machines which are known to be in new or good condition.

These two methods of condition monitoring are compared in greater detail in Table 1 , and
the resulting advantages in terms of the provision of lead time and better machine know
ledge are shown in Table 2.

The economics of condition monitoring

The main savings which can be made by the application of condition monitoring to industrial
machinery arise by avoiding losses of output due to the breakdown of machinery, and by red
ucing the costs of maintenance.

Output related losses can be estimated from the number of days output lost multiplied by
the added value output per day. The maintenance costs which can be saved are rather more
difficult to quantify, but are likely to relate mainly to the labour costs of breakdown mainte
nance. Both these forms of saving have been studied in greater detail in a recent survey car
ried out for the Department of Industry (Refs.), and a figure of the order of 7 5 0 million per
year has been estimated for the maximum conceivable saving which could be obtained by
applying condition monitoring across the whole of British Industry. This is shown in Fig.4,
which also gives the contributions to this total figure which could be made by the various in
dustrial sectors. This suggests that the savings which might be made, on this basis, amount
to an average of about 1 % of added Value output with a range for various sectors of from
0,5% to 3%.

Of the total sum of 7 5 0 million per year, 65% arises from output related savings and 35%
from maintenance related savings. Unfortunately this figure of 7 5 0 million per year is not
really obtainable as a real saving, because not all industrial plant, processes and establish
ments are suitable for the application of condition monitoring.

One method of obtaining a more realistic figure for the likely savings is to identify the indus
trial sectors which operate suitable plant machinery, and then to take the savings from
these sectors only, in order to reach a more realistic total.

Industrial sectors which rely on machinery rather than on manual work to produce their out
put will be particularly appropriate for condition monitoring, and sectors of this type will
have a high value of:

Annual capital invested in plant and machinery per employee.

4
 O)

H* to
C/3
Jta.

OJ iP
_Q CD
O 0)
h-' to
<o CD
O TD H-

"T3
E C o
> CD
"5 CO

CO <
>
<D o E

c
T" T"
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 " " " p p p p p p * * - p * * p - * 4 P * 4 4 4 4 * 4 * * * * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 * P * * 4 P 4 P * P

c
I
4 P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 P 4 4 P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
4 4 4 * * * * * * * * 4 * * * 4 4 * P * 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 * * * * 4 * * * * - 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 4 * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 *
|
P * 4 4 4 * 4 4 * 4 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I * * * * * * * * * * * 4 * * P P P P P 4 - 4 P P P P P 4 4 4 4 4 P 4 4 " 4 4 4 4 4
4 P P * * * P * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 * * * * * * * * * * 4 * 4 * * * * 4 4 4 4 * * 4 4 4 4 4 * * * 4 4 4 P *
P 4 * 4 * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 P P P P P P P * * 4 * * P P 4 P P P 4 4 P4 P P P 4 4 P 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 4
4 4 P * * * P P P P P P 4 * * * * 4 4 4 P - 4 * P 4 4 4 * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** 4 *4 4 ** * * * 4 4 4 4 * * 4 4 4 P *
4 4 4 * 4 * * 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 * P * * * * 4 4 * P P P P P P P 4 * I - 4 4 - P 4 4 4 P * P P 4 4 4 4 4 4 P 4 4 4 4 4 4 P 4 * 4 ** 4 4
4 4 4 4 P P P * P 4 4 * 4 4 4 * * 4 4 4 4 * * * 4 * 4 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 * * * 4 4 4 P P P 4 4 4 * P
4 4 * * 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 * P P P P * P P * 4 * 4 4 4 P P 4 P 4 4 4 4 4 P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4
ta44P************44444444*44*******************4444**44444*44444P
I P M | W > * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * * * * P * * 4 * 4 * P P P P P P P P P * * 4 * * 4 P 4 P P 4 I I 4 4 4 4 P P P P 4 4 4 4 4 4 P P 4 4 4 4
^ " " V ^ k - * P P * * * * * 4 * 4 * f 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * 4 4 * 4 * 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 * * * * * * * 4 4 4 * * * * * 4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 * ^ 1
""^P11W_+ 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 P P P P * * 4 P P P P P * 4 4 : P P P 4 4 4 1

* * *
* 4 *
*

*
4

P
*
*
4
*
l
f c L
*^*Ji^^U
4 P P P ^ " ^ f c *
* * * * *
^
4
p p p p p * * P 4
4

*4^^gi
4
p
4

*
p
4
p
4

*j*a*fai*
f
4
4
4

*
*
4

*
4
*
4
4
*
*
4

*
4
*
4

*
*
4
*

*

*
4

*
*
*
*

*

*
4

*
P
*
*
P

*
*

*
4

*
*
*
4

*
*
*
4

*
*
*
*

4
*
*
*

-
*
*
4
4
P
*
4
*

*
P

-
*

*
*

P
*

*
P

P
*

P
*

P
*

P
*

*
4

P
4

*
P

P
4

*
P

P
*

*
*

4
*

*
4

4
*

*
4

4
*

*
4

4
*

*
4

-
*

4
P
*

P
4
*

P
4
*

*
4
4
*

*
4
*
*

4
P
P
*

4
P
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4

*
4
4
4

4
4
*

4

4
*

4

P
i

4
*
*
P

4
4
*
4

P
4
*
4

P
4
*
P

4
4 4 *

-
r \ *|
* *
4
4
4
* * 4
4 4
4
4 4 4
4 P
4 * 4
4
03
p- p p p p p p 4 ^ * , ^ * """"""A * 4 4 * 4 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I 4 4 * * * * * 4 4 ^irfU * * 4 4 *
* * 4 * * * * * * * * * * ^ * H ^ ^ ^ ^ P 4 4 * P P P P * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 P P P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 P P P P P 4 ^ ^ ^ ^ T 4 P * 4 4 4 * * * * * * * 4 * * * * * * * 4 * * * * * * * * * 4 * 4 4 4 * * 4 4 4 *"** * * 4 4 4
* 4 * * * * * * * 4 i * 4 * t ^ K J 4 4 4 * P P * * * * * * * 4 * * * 4 4 P P P 4 4 4 * 4 * 4 4 P 4 4 P 4 4 P 4 4 4 4 P P P 4 4 4 I 4 4 4 4 4
I 4 4 P P P P P P P P 4 l k 4 4 4 * 4 * * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 * * * * 4 4 j ^ * * 4 4 4
4 * 4 * 4 * * * * * * 4 4 * * 4 r ^ u 4 4 4 * P P * * * * * 4 - * 4 - 4 * 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 - 4 ^ 4 P 4 4 4 P 4 ^ 4 4 4 P P P 4 I 4 4 4 4 4
I 1 4 4 P P P P P P P 4 P 4 4^VAjfj 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 * * * * 4 4 IHPPJ * 4 * 4 4
4 * * * * * * * * 4 * I 4 4 4 4 * **IAW_4 * * P P * P * P * P * * * * 4 * 4 * 4 4 P P 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 P 4 4 4 P P 4 4 4 4 4 P 4 P 4 4 4 * 4 1
1 * 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 ^ ^ ^ U * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 4 P P * * * * 4 4 * * * 4 P
* 4 4 4 * * * 4 4 4 4 ^ ^ ^ p B * * P 4 P P P P 4 4 * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 * 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 * 4 * 1

c5
4 4 *
1 * 4 4 4 4 P * 4 4 4 4 * * 4 * ^ ^ H ^Pjfc * * * * * * * 4 4 4 * 4 * * * * * * * 4 4 4 P * p p p | . p * p p p p p p p p * p I * * * * *
4 4 4 * * * * * * 4 * * i * * * l ^ ^ ^ n * ^ P W * * 4 P P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 4 ^ 4 4 4 4 4 4 m M H ^ 4 4 * * 4
1
4 4
4 4 4 * 4 * * * * * 4 4 4 ^ ^ * * *^*lfc* 4 4 * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 * * P * * 4 4 4 4 p p p p p p p i . p p p p p p p t * J * * * 4 4
V
4 4 *
4 *4 * 4 * * 4 4 * * 4 P 4 4 ^ l w * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * > 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 * 4 P l i 4 4 4 4 * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * 1
F 4 4 4 4 * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ^*fl# * * * 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 * * P 4 * 4 4 p p p p p * # # p p p p p p p # * * * * * P
4 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 * 4 P 4 V p h 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 * * * * * 4 * 4 * 4 * 4 * * * * * 4 4 4 4 * * * 1
1 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * *"p4L. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * P P P * * * 4 P P P P P * * * * 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 * * * * * * * 4 * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 P ^ k 4 4 _ * - h . 4 * 4 4 4 * 4 * * * 4 * 4 * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 * * * * 4 4 4 * * 4 ^ " " ^ " C 4 * * * 1
1 * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 * * * * * * * * * * 4 ^ - W* fliiiiK 4 * 4 P P P P 4 P P P 4 * * 4 4 4 P 4 4 p p p p p * p 4 4 p 4 4 4 4 4 [ J 4 4 4 4 4
4 * P p p p p p 4 4 4 P * * * * * 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 * ^ p k * 4 i i i i B * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 * 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 ^ 4 * 4 4 * * 1
i * * * * * * 4 4 4 * 4 P P P P P P P 4 * * 4 ^kTpliiir * + 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 JBHH 4 4 4 4 4
4 4 4 p p 4 * 4 4 4 4 * - * * 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 * l ^ - f l J n * * * * * 4 4 4 4 P P * * 4 n p * p p p p p p * * . i p p p p f 1 \ 4 P P * 1
l * * 4 * 4 4 4 * P P P P * P P P P 4 4 4 i 4 i 4 4 % + 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * * 4 * 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 ^ ^ | F 4 4 * * 4
4 4 4 p 4 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ^ k 4 * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 P P P P * * 4 P 4 - p p p p p p p * p i - p p p p _^ P P P P l
l * * 4 4 4 4 4 * P P P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 ^ k 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 * * * 4 * * * * 4 4 4 4 * * * * * 4 * * * * * * 4 fl 1 * * * * *
4 4 4 4 4 * * * * 4 * * * * * * 4 * 4 4 4 P 4 4 P 4 ^ k * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 P P P P P . l i p i - i - 4 - p p p p p p p * i f l - p p p p 1-1 J 4 p p p 4
1 * * 4 * * 4 4 4 * P 4 4 * * 4 4 * * * 4 4 * * * * 4 * ^ p - J 4 4 * 4 4 * * H * l i l i * * * * * 4 4 4 1 i * * * 4 4 * * * l i * * ^ ~ * * * * *
* 4 * 4 4 * * * * 4 * * * * * * 4 4 4 P 4 4 P P P ^ K P 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 I 4 4 4 4 4

4 * 4

* *
1

p
4 *
4
*

p
4

4
*

p
4
4
*

4
4
4
*

4
4

4
4

4
4
*
4

4
4

4
4

4
*

*
4

4
*

*
4

4
*

*
4
*
*

4
*
4
*
*
*

4
*
*
*

*
4

4
4

*
*

*
*
*

*
*
*

*
*

*
*

4
*

*
4
*

*
*
4
*

*
4
P
*

*
4
P
*
*

4
*
4
*
*
*
*
P

4
*
*
P

4
*
4
* ^ ^ ^ L *
^ ^ ^ L P

4
^ H ^ b 4
4 ^ k *
4
4
4

4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4

4
4
4
P

4
4
4
B

4
4
4
P
*

4
4
*

P
4

4
*

P
4

4
*

P
4
4
*

4
*
4

*
4

4
*
*
4

4
*
*

4
4
4
p
4

4
p
p

4
*
p
p
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
p
4

4
#
.
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
*
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
a
4

4
a

*
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
*
4

4
#

p
4

4
4jB*p4|i1
I * * * * *

*
4 4 * 4 *
*
4 4 4 * *
* * * 05
1 P * * * 4 4 * 4 4 * 4 * * 4 * * * * * * * * B B B B * * * **fc 4 4 4 4 P P P 4 : P * * * * p p p p p p p . p p p p p p p . . v v v p p p p p
4 4 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 * P 4 4 4 4 4 " b 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 * 4 * *
t p 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * mmm 4 * 4 4 4 P P P * * * 4 . f l - p p p p p | i * i # p p p p p p p | - p p p p p p p * i f l -
4 * 1 4 4 4 4 4 P P P P P * P * P P * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 t A - * 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 * * * 4 . 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 * * 4 4 * 4 * 4 4 4 * * * * 4 * * 4 * *
P 4 * 4 P * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 * 4 * 4 * 4 * * * * * jpfp^^k* * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 P P 4 * * P P P P * * 4 4 4 P P * * *
4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 * P P P P P P P * * 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 * * 4 ^ L * * * * * * * * * * * 4 * * * * * 4 4 4 * * * * * * * t * * * * 4 4 4 *
l * * * * * * * * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * P P P * P P * * * *tAfAf&V^L * 4 * 4 4 4 P 4 P * 4 4 * 4 P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 P P I I 4 I P 4 4 P 4 P 4 4
* * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * ^ ^ * * * * * * * * * * * . * * * * 4 4 * * * 4 4 4 4 * * 4 4 4 4
I * * * * * * * 4 * 4 4 4 P P P P P P P * 4 P * 4 4 * 4 JIVB P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 P 4 4 4 4 4 4
* * * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * W * * * * * * * * . * P * * * * 4 4 P P * * * * 4 4 4 P * * * * * 4 4 P *
1 * * * * * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
4 # 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 * * * * * 4 * * * * * 4 * 4 4 4 4 * * * * T*V * * m * + + * m * * * m m w w w + * * * m w w + + * * * * * w w + * * * m v
1 * * * * * * 4 * 4 4 4 P 4 4 P 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ^ L 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 4
* * * P 4 4 4 4
1 * * * *
* * * 4 4 4 P 4 P4 P4
*

*
4
4
*

*
4
4
*

*

4
*

*
*
4
*

*
4
*

4
*
4
*

*
*

4
*
4
4
*

*
*
*
*

4
*
*
*

4
*
*
4

4
*
*
4

*
*
*
P

4


4

4

*
4

*


P

*

*
4

4
*
*
4

4
*
*
4
*
*
*
4
4
4
*
4
*
*
*
4
4
*
4
4
4
*
4
4

4
P
4
4

*
P
4
P
4
4

P
4
4

*
P
*
4
*
4

4
VTJW
&
^ L *
* _ *
4
*
4
*

*
4

*
*

*
4

*
*

*
4

*
*
*

4
*
4
4
*
*
4
*
P
*
P
4
P
*
P
*
*
*
*
4
.
.
4

*
p
p
4

*
p
p
4

4
p
p
4

4
p
p

4
4
*
*
4

*
#
*
4

*
p
p

*
4
p
p
4

*
p
p
4

*
p
p

*
4
p
p

4
p
4
p
4

4
4
p
4
i
4
#

#
*
4
#

p
*
*
p

p
*
4
p

p
*
4
p

p
*
*
p

p
*
*
p

p
4
4
*

p
4

4
#

#
*

*
p

p
4

*
p

p
4

4
p

p
4

4
p

4
4

*
p

p
CD

"t3
0)
C:

CO
0)
>

CO

.9
0)
Q

C35

c:

-2
0)

Oi

00

CO
O
CD
CD
o

5

TREND MONITORING
Readings taken at
TIMING OF regular time intervals
MEASUREMENTS while the machine is
running.
Skilled operators can
do subjective trend
QUALITATIVE
monitoring if they
MEASUREMENTS
are close enough to
their machines.
The taking of regular
measurements and their
QUANTITATIVE recording and analysis
MEASUREMENTS gives a lead time on
machine problems.
CONDITION
Table 1. A comparison of Methods of Condition
CONDITION CHECKING
Readings taken at
one time while the
machine is running.
Typical activity of
an engineer when
checking a machine
during operation.
Numerate values allow
comparison with
established standards or
other similar machines to
give knowledge of machine
condition.
MONITORING
Monitoring and of Failure
PROBLEM OR F A I L U R E
DIAGNOSIS
When the problem
has become manifest
or after failure has
occurred.
When machine is
stopped, inspection
of components can
indicate the cause
of the problem.
Measurements may be
analysed in considerable
detail to provide
guidance on possible
causes of the problem.
Diagnosis
 METHODS BY WHICH CONDITION MONITORING
ADVANTAGES GIVES THESE ADVANTAGES
OBTAINED
Lead Time Better Machine Knowledge

>
Reduced injuries and Enables plant to be Machine condition, as
LU Fatal Accidents to stopped safely when indicated by an alarm,
instant shut down is
SAF

Personnel caused by is adequate if instant

Machinery. not permissible. shut down is permitted.
1

1
1
1

Enables machine shut Allows time between

More down for maintenance to planned machine overhauls
be related to required to be maximised and, if
Running production or service, necessary, allows a
and various consequential machine to be nursed
Time losses from unexpected through to the next
1ncreased
shut downs to be avoided. planned overhaul.

n n i
Enables machine to be Reduces inspection time
Machine shut down without after shut down and
Less destruction or major speeds up the start of
damage requiring a long correct remedial action.
Availability repair time.
Maintenance
Enables the maintenance
team to be ready, with
H spare parts, to start
Time
a. work as soon as machine
1
1

Z) is shut down.
O

Allows some types of

machine to be run at
Increased Rate of increased load and/or
speed.

Net Output Can detect reductions

in machine efficiency
or increased energy
consumption.
aV
" " "" - . - i i - - * - - " " * *-

Allows advanced Can be used to reduce

planninq to reduce the
9 ^fcj'
the amount of product
Improved Quality of effect of impending or service produced
breakdowns on the at sub-standard quality
customer for the product levels.
Product or Service
or service, and thereby
enhances company
reputation.

Table 2. The advantages obtained by the use of Condition Monitoring

1
 Estimated Total Conceivable Gross
Annual Savings from Condition
Monitoring Million
1,000
750
Total level of saving if condition monitoring
* V * 4 *

could be applied 100% throughout British 4 4- I T 1

/ * 4 - * 4 * < < 4

Industry. 4 * w w 4 4 *^r+ / * *

&
'A
6/
y o. *>,:

o ^
V

%V,
100 %%s K% >, f/

<s>,
F
* w m

L* 4 4 *
* + * * * < + * > * * * + *^r* * + * * * *
* 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 4

4 4 4 4- * 4
+ 4 4

i * * I k * + *> 4 *- * v *
W 4 4 4 4 4
v 4 *

4 * * *> v ^ T + * 4 4 * h# v v 4 +

'tf>. F
* 4 4- *i * \ 4 4 * V * V * 4 * 4 4
* v 4 *4tF*> v * * * * * v * 4 * > A * 4 * * *> 4

<5>. 4 4 *

% ,

t v w * * * 4 v v * 4 * > P * 4 4 * 4 4 * * * 4 *
o.
4 * ^ 4- t ^ T M i l rt 4 4 4 4 - 4 V 4 4
"V *
* 4 4 4 * * *
A
'O,
10
*- * * *
4 M +
4 4 *

4 *
*

* V *
4 4 * * * 4 * * *
s> VJ
^ > .

a*
'

c V,
o; %

4 1 * * 4 4 * * * * * 4
*> * *

V-

4 fr * 4 4 4 * * * j ^ r 4 4 4 4 <
* * * *

frrt4***444*
* *

4 * * 4j*r* * * * * * * * * * * 4 4

1 r-TT
100 1,000 10,000 100,000

Annual Added Value Output Million

f/<7.4. . The total conceivable gross annual savings from Condition Monitoring in the United
Kingdom (January 1978 values)

8
Also, if the plant is concentrated in one place and operated intensively, condition monitoring
will again be particularly applicable, and industrial sectors using plant in this way will have
a high value of:

Annual added value output per establishment.

Thus, guidance can be obtained as to the likelihood of the ownership of machinery which is
suitable for condition monitoring in various industries, if these two variables are compared,
and Fig.5 shows such a comparison for those industrial sectors which make up the extrac
tion industry, the manufacturing industry, and the utilities of the United Kingdom. On this di
agram, the sectors which are towards the top right hand corner will have the highest value
of both variables, and will be particularly likely to contain industries using machinery which
is suitable for condition monitoring. Industrial sectors towards the bottom left hand corner
are likely to have unsuitable machinery.

When only those sectors which are above average in suitability for condition monitoring are
selected from Fig.5, a more realistic figure for the estimated savings of the order of 4 4 0
million per year is obtained. This, however, is still rather high because some of the esta
blishments in these industrial sectors may be too small to apply condition monitoring effec
tively. This idea arises from experience with condition monitoring at the present time, which
suggests that for successful application it is necessary to have at least one man at an esta
blishment who is involved full time on condition monitoring. In this way he can maintain his
expertise at interpreting readings and trends. In the recent survey (Ref.) the critical size of
establishment from this point of view was assessed as corresponding to an added value out
put of 1 million per year. This corresponds in the relevant industrial sectors of British in
dustry to a total of about 2 0 0 0 establishments, and as a result drops the maximum savings
which industry could obtain, using its own staff for monitoring, down to 3 0 0 million per
year. The lost savings could, however, probably be recovered by the provision of external
condition monitoring services supplied under contract to smaller industrial establishments
by a specialist organisation.

Finally, any estimate of the likely savings needs to take into account the operating costs of
condition monitoring systems and based on a study of similar activities included in the sur
vey (Ref.), a figure for operating costs of about 16% of the gross saving appears to be rea
sonable. This corresponds to a total national cost of about 1 6% of the gross saving appears
to be reasonable. This corresponds to a total national cost of 5 0 million, and a total prob
able net saving of 2 5 0 million pounds. This is brought out more clearly in Fig.6, which
shows how this net saving is likely to be obtained as a progressively greater number of in
dustries decide to use condition monitoring. This figure also shows that, with some im
proved techniques and with the wide provision of external services to industry, for the condi
tion monitoring of plant, a further 1 50 million per year might be saved.

Equipment Requirements

If the application of condition monitoring can be expanded to the degree indicated in Fig.6
with a probable net annual saving to industry of 2 5 0 million, there will be considerably in
creased market for condition monitoring equipment. The studies of the costs of operating
condition monitoring systems have suggested that the achievement of net savings of 2 5 0
million is likely to correspond to an equipment market of the order of 1 3 million per annum.
This figure mainly relates to the supply of equipment for use by larger establishments for
carrying out their own monitoring, and the market is likely to take a few years to build up to

9
 Annual Added Value
Output per Establishment, 0
Million
10-r
+
/

gas, electricity and water

coal and petroleum products :\\\-\::\

i vehicles chemicals and allied industries

+ * * 4

electrical engineering i i metal manufacture

4 + + * * # 4 * * * 4 4 4 * *^L*

I k i i i i i i i S food, drink and tobacco

1
shipbuilding and marine e n g i n e e r i n g ^

itextiles ::..
bricks
mechanical engineering i i i i i i i i i i i i i ^ i i * ' Pottery, glass, cement, etc
instrument engineerings-
r

; other manufacturing industries

ft paper, printing and publishing

metal goods not elsewhere specified

leather, leather goods and f u r !

0,1

0,01
10 100 1000 10,000
Annual Capital Invested in Plant and Machinery
per Employee, I

Fig. 5. The selection of industrial sectors which are suitable for Condition Monitoring (Janu-
ary 1978 values)

10
this level. In addition, however, there is the need for equipment for use by organisations pro
viding contract services in condition monitoring for smaller industries, and if these can be
stimulated as well, the 1 3 million per annum level of the potential market should be
reached more rapidly, and probably exceeded in due course. In the much longer term there
could also be a further increase in the size of the market if a new generation of equipment
can be developed to help smaller industries to do their own monitoring without the need to
use external contract services to as large an extent as might otherwise be necessary.

The existing equipment tends to be unnecessarily elaborate and expensive, and a consider
able market exists for simpler and cheaper equipment. The latter could provide a new oppor
tunity within the condition monitoring equipment market, which British instrument and elec
tronic equipment manufacturers might be stimulated into entering.

The equipment needs to have a number of special features, which are not fully met by that
which is available at present. The following points which emerged from the survey may be
of some help to potential manufacturers:

1. The equipment must be robust to stand inevitable misuse. Equipment designed for labor
atory bench top use is not suitable. Indicating instruments must stand being dropped,
leads must tolerate being trampled on, and the whole equipment must be resistant to
dirt, dust and common industrial fluids. Portable equipment needs to be particularly ro
bust, and should have its own internal battery power supply.

2. The equipment must be reliable and have a simple facility for checking its calibration or
correct operation, so that the user confidence can be maintained.

3. The equipment must have sufficient accuracy and consistency to enable it to be used for
checking trends when taking measurements over a period of the order of a year.

4. The equipment may often have to be used in hazardous areas, and an intrinsically safe
version needs to be available.

5. Electronic equipment and its leads need to be suitably screened, as it frequently has to
be used in areas where high interference levels may exist.

6. There are probably three levels of equipment required:

(a) Very simple portable equipment with a simple unswitched indicator or warning
lights, for use by relatively unskilled personnel.

(b) More comprehensive, but still portable, equipment for use by more skilled or special
ist operators doing trend monitoring or condition checking.

(c) Comprehensive special equipment for the continuous monitoring of particular plants.
This can be installed and commissioned by experts, and operated under skilled super
vision.

There were also some needs for new equipment and methods, which emerged from the sur
vey, and which could provide guidance for further research and development. Examples of
these needs are:

11
 Estimated Annual Net Savings
from Condition Monitoring by
the Stated Number of Industries

Million

0 40 80 120 160
Number of Industries Using
Condition Monitoring
(in order of decreasing potential
for Condition Monitoring)

The broad pattern of annual savings from Condition Monitoring in the United King-
dom (January 1978 values)
1. One of the main limitations on the wider application of condition monitoring is the cost
of the labour required to study trends in the information being monitored. Instruments
which are trend sensitive rather than instantaneous value sensitive could have a wide
application.

2. There is a need for better practical equipment for the condition checking of smaller ma
chines containing many high speed small components, and for determining which com
ponent is defective. A simplified form of vibration monitoring with signal averaging is
probably one such technique.

3. There is a need to develop an improved method of monitoring hydraulic systems.

4. There is a lack of industrial flow measuring techniques which can conveniently be in

stalled in an existing machine.

Concluding comments

This paper is based on the much fuller report of the Survey of Condition Monitoring for the
Department of Industry (Ref.), and it is hoped that the data extracted from it will indicate the
technical and economic importance of condition monitoring, and will give plant users and
equipment manufacturers an indication of the interest that they should be taking in the sub
ject.

References

1. A Survey of Condition Monitoring in British Industry and its Potential for wider Applica
tion. Michael Neale and Associates Report TRD 187 for the Department of Industry.
June 1 9 7 5 .

2. An Updating of Report TRD 187 (1975) to Determine the Potential in 1 9 7 8 for the Ap
plication of Condition Monitoring in British Industry. Michael Neale and Associates Re
port TRD 2 2 3 for the Department of Industry. April 1 9 7 8 .

13
 9

A Worldwide network of Briiel & Kjaer agencies and service centres

serve the fields of Vibration and Acoustics.

B & K market a complete range of instrumentation which is widely used

for the detection, measurement, analysis and recording of mechanical vibration
in connection with the condition monitoring of running machinery.
The product range also includes instrumentation systems for the permanent monitoring
of vibration parameters on critical process machinery.

B
- Briiel & Kjaer DK-2850 N/ERUM, DENMARK-Telephone: + 4 5 2 80 05 00-TELEX: 37316 bruka dk