We are at a crossroads with our current PdM vendor. We currently use RDMware and have been in bed with them since 1993. A lot has changed with our needs and at CSI, Emerson, since 1993. One of the major changes with CSI is the decline of their customer service, which was first class. Who are some of the current main players in the collection and trending PdM data arena? Is the grass really greener on the other PdM fence? Will we experience the same, or worse problems with other vendors? What are others using and how do you like their products and support?

I'm afraid the news may not be good. I think vendors on the whole are trying to watch the bottom line more and across the board globally the service trend and what you get for your dollar is declining - just seeing some of the feedback over the last couple of months on similar topic - as well as personal experience.
Unfortunately those big vendors who deal with not only Pdm but also the wider picture eg control systems seem to see pdm as a little distraction from the main money which control systems in general is becoming. Not to mention the fact that the two are fast becoming one.
My 2cents worth.

Mike.

You might want to check out Comtest. I talked to a guy named Troy Broussard who was from somewhere in Texas and was a rep for them.

Agree with Danny, I have both used and still represent Commtest. They provide a very fine series of single and dual channel analyzers and software, and you can't beat the price. As a former CSI employee, I would be happy to discuss your needs offline. Commtest support is just down the road from CSI in beautiful Knoxville.

There are a number w/micro systems and the not-so-micro....... You may want to look at Conditech and their new ME-67 weighting in ~10,000 w/support and software, includes lic. Regardless, you may want to include it when looking at things of interest.

As an independent consultant (for way to many years!!), I use or have used, almost all of the prominent systems from the major vendors. Additionally, my company owns systems from two of the "biggies". In my opinion and experience, all mfg's make promises that few can keep. The reasons vary, but we seldom recommend to a client they scrap one system for the latest and greatest. We feel it's usually best to use and optimize what you've got, rather than "jump the fence" to another mfg. Functionally, all the better systems are about the same, but there's a learning curve for each system. Additionally, you usually lose all your old data or have to maintain two databases. I'm sure the mfg's will disagree with me and YMMV. Good luck to you.
David

Agree, and the trouble is you buy a system from a vendor you think is good and they get bought out by one that is not so good and it all goes out the window - "the only thing certain is uncertainty itself"

My 2c worth

Mike.

My mistake previous statment - should have been ME-72 and is expandable with IR camera, temps, current, and comes w/tach, transducer and case. They have a download evaluation. Does PdM and take a look.

Changing vendors should be exteremely simple: all instruments should comply w/ISO standards and NIST traceable and work according to Hoyle. A spectrum is a spectrum or should be. Vendors that install little quirks and gimmicks to attempt to lock you in to one set avenue will in all probability not be there when technology passes them by.

I mentioned DLI as an inovator but don't exclude SKF or Conditech and a others. What your budget and where are you in your program; crawling stage, walking or ready to run for the yellow shirt.

What's your particular situation/budget and you want equipment to build on and expand? Make your requirement list and minimum standards list and categorize vendors to fit you means and goals. Afterall, not everybody starts at the top but you do want something that is stil useful and not collecting dust when you do buy into additional equipment or software.

www.DLIengineering.com

Our support is still top-notch and we are remaining very much involved in the portable data collector / online monitoring business.

I am trying to read between the lines in the posting. You are claiming that CSI support is declining. In what subjects and in what way are they declining? There has not been more people and more experience there at any day in the past. It was just one person 1986... Is the manual too thick to read for you, or is the soft unstable and you cannot control it or can it not cope with your vibration phenomena? What is the bottom line problem that made your frustration grow to the point of initiating the posting? Forgive me the curiousity, but I think this is an interesting issue, that I have seen chasing many persons using proactive systems in general after a period of time using any system.

I read regurlarly reports made with all from old 12115 and MTWIN v3.50 to most recent CSI tools and when it comes to the point, I cannot see much difference, if really any, in what is used in the diagnostics, needed and presented to show a case well.

Very few, if really anyone, are using all features that the instruments and RBMware have. Whatever can the competition offer that could outweigh all the trouble to build all routines from scratch when swapping systems? How many machines will you miss to call in the right or optimal moment at what company cost in outlays, production and goodwill loss until you have learned the hard way the new limits and traps.

This question does not apply to CSI in specific but I wanted to focus the issue of your own question about green grass. In more cleartxt: Are you sure that you are using the present tools optimally? What do you plan to invest in costs and time to learn the traps before you eventually transfer to another make?

Could it be a cost/benefit analysis of the support fee possibly? Olov

Just a word on costs. I think the focus is too much on getting a system at lowest price. The price for a full system and full maintenance/support plus your own salary per year, even doubled, is normally peanuts of no importance at all, when compared to the billions an effective system saves when handling typically some 400 to 1600 aggregates by a good analyst in any plant. I have even a case of a "simple" ferry "plant" ((database has just 273 aggregates) having the most expensive system where the chief has documented a savings in known avoided maintenance costs from before system was started (ship is 18 yrs old) that paid off the full cost, manhours included at 16 days first year, 11 days second year and last year 18 days of a years maintenance repair budget reduction.

System price can be negotiated with vendor of a total service. Will the customer pay a dividend of the savings if he gets the full service free? An early customer said already 1988 he saved +800 000 USD first year in not used spares stock. That was only using a single antique CSI 2100....

I basically agree, at least two problems. Bean counters count beans and they do that one by one if you then don´t have the full statistics to backup the costs, the bean counter may request a cost benefit comparison for the external costs involved.
So an startup saving is huge and what pat on the back did the maint. chief get? A bashing for having so much unused spares on the shelf. What is the situation now 15 years later with a mature program. Higher costs and no failures, "Why do we have maintenance when there are no failures?" resulting in cost cutting and outsourcing.
When working in a narrow minded, short sighted, one eyed world you better keep the documentation of savings updated when the bean counters start to "enhance maintenance".
There is a real problem to keep a mature program ticking and funded as the days of hero efforts in great savings and drastic maintenance cust are gone if you made a proper job.
First thing that happens is that the major cost of the staff involved hit a cutting. Then the guy with the zeal, the driving individual quit or get a pension. Then there is a single guy with a stiff system maintenance fee. And then.........
Should you then have the costs if you can´t prove the short term savings required? Ask a bean counter.
Another scenery today, if you invest $100 000:- to get systems and training for 2 plants, and a yearly system cost of $10 000:- will that be more cost effective and better than a system that cost $50 000:- and only cost to upgrade when you like to have the enhanced features offered. In the other technical aspects very similar as systems are today? Olov