# Eccentric Gears

Typical Symptoms: 1x radial (in Vertical and Horizontal directions)

Like eccentric pulleys, Eccentric gears generate strong 1x radial components, especially in the direction parallel to the gear.

They would also generate sidebands of the running speed of the eccentric gear around the GMF (gear mesh frequency). However, harmonics of GMF may also be generated (depends on the severity of the problem). Natural frequency might also be excited.

Time waveform: The waveform will have combination of 1x running speed of input and output shafts plus strong gear mesh vibration modulated by the running speed of the shaft having the eccentric gear.

Phase: Not applicable.

# Eccentric Pulleys

Typical Symptom: High 1x in the direction parallel to belts. Though 1x component can be found on both Vertical and Horizontal directions.

Instead of the typical Vertical and Horizontal directions it is best to choose the directions parallel and perpendicular to the belts.

The high 1x can be found on both sub-assemblies (e.g. the motor and fan). Since the motor and the fan would run at different speeds we would also find two distinct peaks on the signature corresponding to the motor and fan running speeds. Confirmation about which pulley is eccentric can be obtained by removing the belts and checking for the presence of high 1x on motor in the direction parallel to the belts.

Time waveform would be sinusoidal when viewed in velocity.

Phase: Phase reading taken parallel and perpendicular to belts will either be in phase or 180 degrees out of phase.

# Eccentric Stator

General Symptom: 2Lf (Lf = Line frequency)

Stator problems would create high vibration at 2Lf. Stator eccentricity produces uneven stationary air gap between the rotor and stator that produces a very directional source of vibration.

Soft foot is often the cause of eccentric stator.

Other key indicators:

1. 2Lf peak would be comparably high
2. For a 2 pole motor this peak would be close to 2N (N= running speed). Would need sufficient resolution to separate them
3. A spectrum may reveal beating — 2Lf and 2N peaks may appear to rise and fall if we don’t have sufficient resolution to separate them.
4. Time waveform  — a combination of 2N and 2Lf would reveal a beat type pattern if the time period covers more than a few seconds. If the time period isn’t long enough, then we would see a wobble or take on the classic M or W shapes due to combination of 1N, 2N and 2Lf.
5. Thermal images would reveal heat bands in the direction perpendicular to the direction of high vibration
6. Vibration would be highest at the point where the stator is closest to the rotor. Move the accelerometer around the motor housing to see if the peak is high in one or two locations.

Dibyendu De

# Eccentric rotor

Symptom: Pole pass sidebands around 1x N (N=running speed) and 2xLf (Lf = line frequency)

Eccentric rotors will produce a rotating variable air gap between the rotor and the stator which induces a pulsating source of vibration. We would see 2xLf. However, there will also be pole pass sidebands around the 2xLv and 1xN peaks. 1xN is expected to be high.

Note: Pole pass frequency is the slip frequency times the number of poles. The slip frequency is the difference (in terms of frequency) between the actual RPM and the synchronous speed.

Presence of pole pass sidebands around 1N and 2Lf is the key indicator of this fault. One needs sufficient resolution to see those sidebands. Else we would either miss them altogether or mistake them for resonance (a broadening of the base of the peak).

Waveform: Time waveform that covers many seconds of time will reveal the pole pass frequency modulation. Due to lack of impacting the waveform will smooth and will be a combination of the 1N and 2Lf frequencies of vibration.

Phase: Not applicable for this fault unless eccentric forces are high in magnitude.

Dibyendu De

# Eccentricity in general

Symptoms are generally 1x radial (Vertical and Horizontal for a horizontally mounted machine).

Eccentricity occurs when the centre of rotation is offset (like offset misalignment) from the geometric centreline of a gear, motor rotor or a pulley.

It would generate strong 1x radial peak — in the direction parallel to the rotor/gear/pulley. This condition is common and mimics unbalance.

For gear eccentricity we would see 1x sidebands

For motor rotor eccentricity we would see pole pass sidebands.

Time waveform would be sinusoidal when viewed in velocity. Vibration from gear will also have gear mesh vibration and modulation of the turning shaft of the offending gear.

Phase: If belt driven, phase readings taken parallel and perpendicular to belts will either be in phase or 180 degrees out of phase. For a direct driven component, vertical and horizontal readings will be 90 degrees out of phase.

# Rotor Bow

General symptom: 1x radial (Vertical and Horizontal direction of horizontal machines)

Usually a rotor bow in a motor looks like a static imbalance. Broken bars and loose connections (at motor terminals and at MCC) cause motors to heat up (localized) owing to uneven current flow through the phases causing rotor bow — uneven weight distribution around the rotor’s centreline. Hence we see high amplitude peak at 1x running speed in the radial and horizontal directions.

Localized overheating can be seen on the motor body through infrared thermal imaging.

The effect of can also be seen on the rotating air gap — a high peak at 2xLf with pole pass sidebands around 1x and 2x peaks. The 2x peak often comes up when the effect is more severe.

The time waveform would be sinusoidal when viewed in velocity.

Phase: expect 90 degree shift between vertical and horizontal axes. The inner race will move in and out once per revolution with a bent shaft

# Notes on detecting Unbalance

Unbalance is a condition where a “shaft’s centreline” and mass centreline don’t coincide or when the centre of mass does not lie on the axis of rotation. This can be visualised as the a heavy spot somewhere on the shaft.

There are three types of unbalance.

1. Static
2. Couple
3. Dynamic — which is a mix of static and couple unbalance — when the rotor is not narrow compared to its diameter or in other words — when the rotor is long compared to its diameter.

With unbalance, we expect to see high amplitude of 1x (fundamental) in the signature. Usually, for horizontal machines, the vibration levels are approximately equal in the radial directions (vertical and horizontal). However, we might expect to see higher vibration in the horizontal direction, which is due to change of stiffness. It can be quite different for a vertically mounted machine where we may find the vibration in the flow direction appreciably higher than the tangential direction, which is perpendicular to the flow direction.

The time waveform should be a smooth sine or wave. If it is not, then other problems like misalignment, looseness , bearing wear might be present. It is a convention to view time waveform and signatures relating to unbalance in velocity.

Phase is a confirmatory indicator. Generally the phase difference between the vertical and horizontal directions are 90 degrees apart (+/- 30/40 degrees).

Static Unbalance

For static unbalance we expect to see large amplitude peaks at 1x in the horizontal and vertical directions with very low amplitude 1x peak in the axial direction. However, if the amplitude of 1x in the horizontal direction is more than 2 times the amplitude of 1x in the vertical direction then foundation looseness or resonance may be suspected.

For static unbalance, phase difference between vertical and horizontal would be 90 degrees and the phase difference at bearings at either end of rotor will be zero (that is “in-phase”) since forces on both bearings are always in the same direction.

Couple Unbalance

Like static unbalance, we would also expect to see large amplitude 1x peaks in the vertical and horizontal direction with a low 1x axial component. Again the phase difference between the horizontal and vertical would differ by 90 degrees +/- 30 degrees

For pure couple unbalance, phase at bearings at either end of the rotor will be 180 degrees out of phase.

However, if a rotor suffering from couple unbalance, is statically balanced it may seem to be perfectly balanced but when rotated it would produce centripetal forces on the bearings and they would be of opposite phase. In such cases a two plane balance is required to correct couple unbalance.

Dynamic Unbalance

Common form of unbalance. A combination of static and couple unbalance. Normally happens in rotors that are long compared to their diameters. Generally a two plane balancing correction is required to correct dynamic unbalance. However, in practice a single plane balance would also prove sufficient.

While phase difference between vertical and horizontal direction on any bearing would be 90 degrees out of phase, the phase difference at bearings at either end of the rotor will be between 30 to 150 degrees out of phase.

Unbalance of overhung machines

Examples — close coupled pumps, axial flow fans and small turbines.

In this case we would expect the 1x component of a signature to be high in all the three orthogonal directions — vertical, horizontal and axial. We see a high 1x axial since unbalance creates a high bending moment on the shaft that causes the bearing housing to move axially. Hence the 1x axial is generally the highest amongst the three directions.

Phase difference

As usual, the phase difference between the vertical and horizontal directions would be around 90 degrees. But axial readings on both bearings will be in phase (zero difference) — since they tend to move in the same axial direction. Similarly, phase readings on both bearings will be in phase.

Unbalance in Vertical Machines

Example: Vertical Pumps like Cooling Water Pumps in Power Plants.

Spectrum will show a high amplitude peak at 1x running speed in the radial direction — horizontal or tangential direction. This is due to variation in stiffness along the radial direction. Generally, the vibration amplitude at the top of the motor (Motor NDE) would be higher than the rest of the machine.

To distinguish motor unbalance from pump unbalance, it may be necessary to de-couple the motor and pump and run the motor solo while measuring 1x. If the 1x component is still high then unbalance exists in the motor; else it is in the pump.

Phase: Look for 90 degrees phase shift between readings taken 90 degree apart. All readings taken in the same direction should be in phase.

# Note on Raised “Noise Floor”

In a spectrum, if the entire noise floor is raised, it is possible that we have a situation of extreme bearing wear.

If the noise is biased towards the higher frequencies in the spectrum then we may have process or flow problem like possible cavitation, which may be further confirmed by high acceleration measurement (or filtered acceleration measurement) on the pump body on the delivery side (since high frequency waves are always localized).

Smaller “humps” may be due to resonance (possibly excited by anti-friction bearing damage, cavitation, looseness, rubs or impacts) or closely spaced sidebands arising from other defects. A high resolution measurement (or graphical zoom and a log scale) may reveal whether the source is problems that exhibit sidebands or a problem of resonance. If  machine speed can be changed, (for e.g.motor connected to VFD drives) the resonant frequency would not move – but the other peaks would. Sidebands will typically be symmetrical around a dominant peak – e.g. 1X, 2X, 2x LF (100 or 120 Hz) etc indicating different faults.

Interestingly, the time waveform would reveal the reason as to why the noise floor has been raised.

We would see signs of looseness, severe bearing wear, rubs, and other sources of impacts in the time waveform. We must make sure that there are 5 – 10 seconds of time waveform if we suspect an intermittent rub (e.g. white metal bearings of vertical pumps or loose electrical connection of motor terminals) or if we suspect flow turbulence or cavitation.

If the time waveform looks normal (making sure there is a high Fmax (following Niquist criteria) and we view the waveform in units of acceleration then increase the resolution in the spectrum to 3200 lines or higher in case we are seeing a family of sidebands (like the sidebands we find around gear mesh frequency or rotor bars).

But if a natural frequency is being excited (necessary condition for resonance) then we have to perform a bump/impact test or a run-up/coast down test to confirm the situation.

# Notes on Belt problem as seen in Vibration Analysis

General Problem: Belt is worn out or is loose on the pulley.

How to detect it in a vibration spectrum: We would find peaks at “belt frequency” (or better known as “fundamental belt pass frequency”) and its harmonics. The highest amplitude peak in the series will often be the twice the belt rate frequency.

The fundamental forcing frequency for such a problem is known as the “belt rate” or “fundamental belt pass frequency”. It is the rate at which a point on the belt passes a fixed reference point. It is always less that the speed of either pulleys (driving and driven).

Calculation of Belt Pass frequency as follows:

Driven RPM =Driving RPM x Driving sheave diameter/Driven sheave diameter

Belt freq = Pi x Sheave RPM x Sheave diameter/Belt length = PixDxN/BL

Where Pi = 3.1416

Spectrum: Look for the belt rate peak (sub-synchronous) and harmonics.  Sometimes the belt rate peak may be cut off by the high pass filter, but the harmonics will be present. Remember we are looking for the 2 times belt rate frequency to confirm the problem.

Time waveform: If the belts are simply worn then the time waveform will not be the best analysis tool.  If a belt has a distinct point of damage then there will be an event in the waveform once per belt revolution. This provides a useful distinction to discern the exact nature of the problem.

Strobe: A strobe is a very useful tool.  If you use the strobe to freeze the movement of the belts then you can inspect them without stopping the machine.  You can also detect slip on multi-belt systems.

# Two approaches to improve — Plant wide Equipment Reliability

The first approach is to conduct a series of training programs along with hand-holding. During such programs, participants apply the concepts discussed in the programs on the critical machines to modify the existing maintenance plan or methods to improve equipment reliability over a period of time. It is effective if the organization fulfills two vital conditions. First, the organization has in place a reasonably competent condition monitoring team and the use of condition based maintenance strategy is quite widespread in its acceptance and application throughout the plant. Second, the number of failures/component replacement in the plant in a year is not more than say 60. We would call this method — The Interactive Training Method.
The second approach is a more hands-on, direct and intensely collaborative. Each critical equipment is thoroughly examined in its dynamic condition to find out its inherent imperfections that cause failures to happen. Such imperfections, once identified by deep study, are then systematically addressed eliminate the existing and potential failure modes to improve MTBF and Safety. Based on the findings, the maintenance plan is formulated or appropriately modified to sustain the gains of implementing the findings. This activity is to be done during the program. This approach is effective when the failure rate in the plant is random and high (more than 60 failures/component replacement in a year) and/or maintenance load is heavy and repetitive along with high maintenance cost in spite of having a reasonably equipped condition monitoring team in place. We would call this — The Deep Dive Approach.

Outline of the two methods: — The processes involved along with approximate costs.

The Interactive Training Method:

1. Such training sessions are conducted once every two months for a duration of 4 days each over a period of 24 months.
2. The training programs would essentially focus on the following == a) the RCM process focussed on Failure Modes b) Vibration Analysis c) Lubrication analysis and management d) Bearing failures and practical reasons e) Root Cause Failure Analysis method — FRETTLSM method. f) Friction, Wear Flow, Heat, g) Foundations and Structures. h) Condition Monitoring of Electrical failures i) Maintenance Planning based on nature of Failure Modes j) Life Cycle Costing k) Auditing RAMS (Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety).that would help in self auditing the process — in total 12 programs
3. Accordingly, there would be 12 visits to the plant. During each visit one of the above topics would be covered. Once the improvement concepts are delivered, the participants (assigned for focussed plant improvement) would collaboratively engage in designing appropriate measures to improve or modify the existing maintenance plan of each critical machine to improve its MTBF and Safety. This activity that involves a fair amount of handholding would be done during the visit. Number of critical machines to be taken up for each visit would be decided by the management or participants. Number of participants = 10 maximum
4. Subsequent paid audits to refine the process would be optional — after the completion of 24 months intervention period.
The Deep DIve Approach:

Such interactive sessions would be conducted once every two months for a duration of 4 days each over a period of 18 months.
2. Each interactive session of 4 days duration would focus on one critical equipment at a time. In total 9 critical equipment would be covered during the 18 months period with a selected group of people, assigned to the project of improving reliability. During each sessions each of the critical equipment would be examined deeply and in totality to find the inherent imperfections that cause different failures in the system.Once, these imperfections are identified, time is taken to appropriately address the “imperfections” and simultaneously formulate or modify the existing equipment maintenance plan for sustaining the gains on an on-going basis. This collaborative activity would be done during the program. In this process, participants learn by doing.
3. In total there would be 9 visits to the plant. During each visit one critical equipment would be taken up for the deep dive study taken to its full logical conclusion. Number of participants = 10 maximum.
4. Subsequent paid audits of the progress is optional.- after the completion of 18 months intervention period.