http://maintenanceforums.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1191034...=330104793#330104793
Following on from the discussions in the above thread, would anyone like to share their experiences around selecting an online condition monitoring system. I am particularly interesting in opinions in relation SPM.

Hi,
Not sure why you are considering SPM for an online system! There are many systems on the market which can complete a full range of monitoring criteria. I am assuming you are contemplating this because of machine criticality. If so, vibration, lubrication, thermal, ultrasound are the philosophies usually recommended for a new online system. SPM is very limiting in my opinion.

Could you expand on why you think SPM is limiting. The way SPM present their systems it seems like it can do it all. What system would you recommend Vibeguy? We do have a large amount of critical equipment.

If it is the same company (ie Shock Pulse Monitoring - SPM). The technique which they adopt is monitoring the difference in the base level of noise with SPM sensors which gives an indication of bearing deterioration. How it measures other mechanical defects (unbalance, looseness, bent shaft, misalignment, belt frequencies etc), is a bit more confusing and not as straightforward as conventional monitoring techniques. With an accelerometer based system, you can identify all of the above mech defects (and lots more) in a range of base units (accelation, velocity and displacement). All in all my opinion is that other systems are a lot more versatile than SPM, and not just for the few points mentioned here. There are many other factors which should be looked at before deciding on your final choice of on line system. Consider, CSI (with RBMware), SKF (with Machine Analyst) to name just a few.

Hello Camrat,
there are many systems out there in the world market and most, but not all, have some exposure in the UK.
The first step in the selection process must be an undertsanding of what equipment you wish to monitor and more importantly why? Have you performed any form of Failure Mode and Effect Analysis? Have you carried out any deep Root Cause Analysis on previous stoppages? These actions are essential to developing a measurement strategy which will trap the defects you want to find.
I have seen many systems installed and failed because these basic steps were ignored.

If you need to talk in more detail outside this public area, you can reach me at tom@reliabilityteam.com

Best Regards,
Tom Murphy

Thanks for the advice so far guys.
Am I correct in thinking that the SPM way of diagnosing improper lubrication is not as unique as they make out and that it can be performed using ultrasound equipment.
Please excuse my lack of knowledge, I am very new to this field. Any of you guys used one of these instuments:-http://www.adash.cz/distrib_dok_pdf/4900/4910lubri_man_en.pdf

Hi Again,
Lube faults can be determined using conventional analysis techniques as well. Usually the high frequency domain. Increased high frequency measurements can be an indication of lube deterioration, fuel dilution (diesel engines), reduced viscosity etc. So yes, the technique is not unique. In my opnion, lube analysis should be done via routine oil sampling together with a vibration monitoring programme. This way the two maintenance practices complient each other very well and give you a sound basis for a good CM programme. Re your link; this seems to be a tool for monitoring lubricant quality and quantity. Havent seen this particular model before, but they are fairly commonplace in the industry. This type of tool should be used as PART of a good CM programme and not to be the principle monitoring tool! If you have a range of critical equipment requiring monitoring, again I would suggest looking at more conventional methods, by conventional I mean - machine criticality identification, hand held FFT data collector, analysis software, Lube programme, ultrasound etc.