Inspired by this thread, I would like to start a small survey what you think is The Next Big Thing (tm) in Vibration Analysis.

Is it MEMS? Or Wireless Monitoring? Maybe it is automated analysis algorithms?

Any new trends, technologies or developments at the horizon?

Yes, all of them. MEMS will lower sensor cost due to the way they are produced when volumes increase.
Wireless if it can be cost effective and the supply of power can be solved some magic way.
I have seen some new algorithms for lo speed bearing analysis otherwise there are no real new under the sun. But they maybe trickle down to more common users.
All this sums up to that it will (must) be cheaper per channel to go on-line from route collection to make that migration and that happens when volume goes up so it´s a chicken and hen problem and I have not seen the hen yet.
So that will be the next step I believe and have done that for 10 years and it adds most of above.
I must say that I have seen limited real innovation the last 10++ years, maybe there is
no real revolutionary to be done here? Just some evolution left? I admit I am not that revolutionary either but I try to figure out something every day and once every 5 years
it ends up to exist IRL, normally not that earth shattering but some step forward for me. Pls. prove me wrong, give me some magic revolutionary to sink my teeth in. OLI

Much of what is driving the direction of condition monitoring is the "human" element, specifically the lack of promising, young techs who want to learn the trade (art?) of vibration analysis, AND who want to go out and do the hot, nasty, routine, and often thankless job of going out and collecting data.

The most cost effective approach is plant-based, where you have a sharp tech, with good analysis equipment, who goes out and consistently and conscientiously collects data on the equipment. The problem is maintaining such a program, again due to human factors. (injury, fatigue, burnout, loss of interest, lack of management support, etc.)

The cost of "hardwired" condition-monitoring for most plant equipment is astronomical compared to walk-around programs. Certainly some equipment NEEDS (demands?)continuous monitoring, but most equipment does not.

I am inclined to believe that vibration is a science rather than an art. We have seen progression over the years with development of instrumentation and software.

Now, many vendors offer auto-diagnostics that work quite well. I have used our ME-42 and it does a pretty good job but has limitations when it comes to being a tool for vibration PdM route programs (fist-line or front-line only).

However, I had an occasion to view the DLI and its auto-diagnostics program. In a word; it is excellent. Mr. Jeff Kershaw came and demoed it and for the demo he asked if I would do the diagnostics: I did. He had real plant data and ran it and I did diagnostic evaluation while it ran and gave my diagnostics - their program was spot-on every time with mine. I was impressed.

So, I personally think that a little further development will make it fully functional as an 'in-plant' analyst with very limited assistance.

They are not the only one's however: keep an eye on our developments. And, probably some others as well. New 4 channel arrivals....... will inform as available.

I have no axe to grind with anyones product, don't have a preference for wireless, or autodiagnostics either, however, all products no matter what it is needs to be evaluated for what it is and how it will fit into ones overall program.

From everything that I have heard, the DLI software is very good, as Sam has stated, but let's put it into perspective and I may be totally off base, but the Navy has a transient workforce and they adapted their product to fit that need, and have done a very good job apparently.

Our situation does not have room for that type of approach, maybe one day it will, but not now. We do have a need for new approaches to data collection which leads us to looking into wireless. There is a lot of equipment that we just don't have time to look at that would benefit from it.

That's good Mick. No one shoe fits all feet. But the OP topic was "Next Big Thing" and I see auto-diagnostics as it. I could be wrong.

But, as you and maybe many others may think: it may be remote and fully automatic. If I'm wrong it won't be the first time.

Back in 1983 I made the BIG statement about Microsoft: "take at look at this men; it won't be around long - see it while you can". That 1988 technology is not only still here but has taken over for the most part. Was I ever wrong!

Rusty.......dude, you nailed it on the head.....

I have run now 5 flavors of rule based "expert systems" over the years and I usually say that if you don´t cheat and give the poor system wrong information it will give a list of problems that may be applicable. I have suggested it for people that have a lot of data and little time for analyzing to select what machines primarily need human attention. In most cases where my humble human overview conclude the same as the magic expert, it will be what is found to be wrong. In some case it was a more exotic problem listed by the expert further down the list but that is actually quite rare...... Well most common faults are the standard ones and the exotic is why you hire a consultant. So the latest I have sent out several hundred boxes with a tiny dwarf "expert system" targeting people that forgot their training or never had one and that works surprisingly well. So maybe "Software Supported Analysis" is the next best thing since sliced bread? So as I normally say, some data is better than no data, some standard answer and heads up is maybe better than a number saying "it´s vibrating like....." as that is frequently obvious for anybody. So a software dwarf may help people more than training they have forgotten or never had? Will this give consultants more work? I did think so but in this case it does not seem to be, sorry. Normally selling a route collector w/o expert system software support create consulting for some weird vibration found, that does not seem to be the case with software supported systems, so that may be the end of us? Why is the interest very limited in adding a expert software to a standard route system part from one where it´s built in? Price? Bad reputation from miss use and taking the software output as the "Real Truth" that it never can be, in my view there still have to be a human doing the final evaluation software so far can do tedious work and list possible things there still have to be a human judging the output. Sorry for ranting but I woke up early and these are things I think about, how can we relieve our fellow humans from boring work and concentrate on the interesting cases or maybe we will get laydoff and replaced by a piece of software.. Is that the basic reason why people hate expert system software? Have a nice weekend. OLI