Looking for users of the Enpac 2500 to get your thoughts about instrument performance and reliability. It has been on the market for awhile and curious about its field performance.

Don,

I have had one for a year now. I am Beta testing a new op system, which appears to answer some of the problems that the original system had.
Reliability has been very good. I have never had a lock up, nor have I had any problems with loss of data, refusal to download, etc. that the DP and the old card system had. There is oodles of memory, and I have never put a card in the thing. Have never needed one.
One of the best things about the enpac is its small size (you don't get tired carrying it for 8 hours), and the fact that you can see the screen in all lighting conditions (I'm 52 so that means a lot).
It is faster (it seems to me) collecting data, and the new Beta sys. is a little bit faster still.
The downside right now is the lack of extra modules. The balancing program sucks. It is all right if all you do is trim balance something that is not too far out, but if you ever cut all the weights off one, or walk up on a wild one, you're going to want the DataPac. The problem is in the autorange function of the Enpac. It gets hung up and can't decide what it wants to do when the vibe is around 5 mils, 10 mils, 20 mils, etc. It autoranges for ever.
Whereas DP starts high and comes down, the Enpac starts low and goes up. Therefore it takes it for ever to get a reading. I won't use it for balancing, although I have used it side by side with the DP for the purposes of comparison and sending my notes back to the product manager to try and convince them that real world balancing is much different than using one of the balancing demo on their desk

There are no other modules released yet (I have a beta of the start up-coast down), but I believe once they get the op sys working, the other modules will follow pretty quickly.

The thing that has me worried is the fact that IRD,EntekIRD, RockwellAutomation Entek, etc. no longer has control of building these things. The DP was done in house, and was developed pretty quickly. Since the Enpac was doled out to DI, and since SKF has bought DI, I kinda feel like they are at the mercy of SKF,DI in getting anything done. SKF copied the box and op sys (with the exception of gSe of course) as soon as the EP came on the market, and I'm not sure as to whether the conflict of interest is really not there (I've been told of course it's not!). It just seems forever getting anything done to improve the system.

It gathers 2 channel data well(minor bugs fixed in Beta3 due out end of month), cross channel works well. It also makes use of frequencies that were set up in Odyssey well. Such as using a high res. spectrum to pick out running speed of a machine. It will take that reading first (no matter how you have the route set up), and use the speed for all calculations in that machines data collection. For example, if you use orders, Enpac will take the data (either manual or as I said above, spectra) first, and then take everything else basing the Fmax orders on whatever the first RPM data was. It works pretty neat. And since it has so much internal memory, you can download with the route all of your frequencies for that machine and display them with the data (for on site troubleshooting). I haven't seen it slow anything down by doing that either.
One of the other things I notice about it that is different is the screen update.
DataPac used a different set of memory for data collection and screen display. I got used to the smooth screen display of the overall vibes line, TWF's, etc. The Enpac is kinda herky jerky, and it appears to me that the collection occurs first, and then the screen updates when it gets the chance. I don't know, just seems to me to be that way.

Sorry for the epistle. I honestly think in the next 3 to 6 months, we'll have a finished product as far as no bugs in the op sys., and the generic modules of Run up Coast down, balancing, and analysis working correctly.
I hope so, I don't want to pay for another e-safe. I just updated mine, and probably won't do another.

Dave

I agree with the above. A couple of minor additions though.

One, the Datapac allowed numerous filter settings, since it was done in the software. The Enpac has a set range of filters. Not bad ones, mind you, but if you already have them established in your software, you might want to change them to agree with the Enpac.

Two, I've been having a problem with ranging. If I use the standard 970i, it seems fine, but when I use a different accel., I get a huge low frequency response, which I think is tied to the ranging of the instrument. I have switched from aggressive autoranging to fixed, but I haven't collected enough data yet to see if this helps.

Lastly, and my biggest concern, is the slow, painful demise of the legacy IRD company. I've ranted on this site before, but they seem to be turning their backs on portable data collection, in the hopes that all the world will buy permanent systems. Which is why Commtest has risen so quickly. Maybe that's the way they want it. But unless there's some REAL innovation out there, we will always be using portable data collection.

All in all, it's been an excellent instrument so far ( and I still LOVE the software ). We need another one, but we're waiting to see whether IRD-Entek-Rockwell-Allen Bradley wants to stay in the business or not. If they don't, then it doesn't make sense for us to invest in the instruments.

Stan,

I really haven't paid attention to the filters.
What effect does something other than the standard 10,160,318,etc, have on the Enpac?

Dave

Without looking back into it, I believe there's some "confusion" in the instrument. As I recall, the Datapac received most of it's instruction from the software, such as filtering and Fmax. The Enpac has these things built in - since these two boxes were built by different companies.

I think is was one filtered on the analog, and one on the digital side of the conversion, but again, I'm going by memory.

Maybe some others out there remember more about it than I do.

Our vibration engineer tried out the Enpac a year or two ago and said that it seemed severely limited in the ability to gather off-route data. Was that something in the early versions that has been corrected?

Stan,

The Enpac still receives it's filters from Odyssey. Both DataPac and Enpac have the analog non integrated filters 10.8 and 160.2, along with the integrated filters 21.6, 318, and 1428 built into the box. Spike energy filters are in there too, but you must have the setup configured to "emulate DataPac" in the setup.

If you use the "smart HP" setting in Odyssey, it uses the 2(Fmax)/number of lines calculation to map to either 318, 160.2, or 1428 filter, whichever one is less than the result of the formula results.
If you use the "overall" setting in Odyssey, it uses the same formula to determine the filter, but will utilize either the 10.8, 21.6, 160.2, 318, or 1428 located in Enpac.

If you want to use a digital filter, you have to set it up in Odyssey just like you did for DataPac and tell it it is a "RSS" filter.

Since this board was built by outside vendor, it also contains the ESP (Envelope Spectrum Processing) filters. Those filters are 0.6 to 1.25kHz, 1.25 to 2.5 kHz, 2.5 to 5 kHz, 5 to 10 kHz, and 10 to 20 kHz. I haven't fooled with these filters, since I don't use ESP. You can't change these filter setting in Odyssey either. There is no "edit filter" when you select one of these. Much like the "High Frequency", "Overall", or one of the other "hard coded" filters within the collectors. In order to use them, you have to set the selection of Emulate DtaPac to "no".

EPETE,

I would have to agree, the off route capabilities used to suck, and in some regard they still do. There is no analysis module like DP has, and you have to use the "off route" mode. There are 6 or 8 selections pops up when you go to this, but they are somewhat confusing right now (names like "same", Opposite").
I use it, I just select one and set up the collection like I want it. It is basically the same selections you would be used to in DataPac. As I said before, there currently is a concerted effort to get the Op Sys corrected. Once that occurs (again, I believe one or two more revisions of Beta copy), then the modules should be fairly straight forward. My biggest concern is how much effort (read that "how quickly") the SKF owned DI will expend toward making a competitive machine work.

I'm sure trying to push things along, sometimes at the expense of feelings and goodwill. But I've paid a good bit out to this company, and have paid my E-safe hostage agreement. I want what I paid for, a small, two channel, color screen analyzer/collector that does all it was sold to do.

Dave

Thank Dave, for clearing it up. It has been awhile, and I was trying to answer from home. I will look into those settings tomorrow.

I agree with leaning on them. The company I work for bought their first instrument from IRD in 1959, I believe. And now, they make us feel like they're not interested.

Thanks for all the responses. We are getting serious about the purchase of a data collector/analyzer to work with Emonitor. I don't think we have any other data collector/analyzers choices to work with Emonitor? Does the Enpac 2500 come with a single plan balancing program or are you required to purchase the 2 plane system to have that ability?

I would like to add some comments. We use the Enpac 1200A, but I have used the 2500 for a two-week trial period.

1) The color screen is awesome. This box is not affected by the sunlight. This is a great feature if you work outdoors.

2) Speed - The 2500 seems faster than the 1200, defintely faster than the Datapac.

3) Autoranging - The problems described above sound identical to issue we have with the 1200. Especially with gap voltage measurements from prox probes. The enpac starts low and ranges upwards. -2.0 V, -5.0 V, -10 V, -20 V. It doesn't seem to matter what the gap voltage is, it will always range upward to the -20 V range. This takes a long time. Changing the autoranging to Agressive on the 2500 seemed to help the problem.

Another issue with the gap voltage measurements is that the screen doesn't display the trend. It appears that the default scale for the graph is positive and can't be changed.

We have also had ski-sloping issue the 1200. I didn't get to use the 2500 enough to see if this was a problem, but Stan's post concerns me.

Another auto-ranging problem we have is with low amplitude readings (< 0.05 ips). The box seems to saturate and flat-lines on a single amplitude. We have had cases where we get identical amplitude values to 6+ decimal points on multiple measurements.

4) I couldn't get the 2500 to display averages when collecting synchronous time averaging measurements.

5) Alarms - The 2500 doesn't indicate an alarm condition with a blinking ALARM icon like the 1200 does.

6) Orbits - I had problems collecting a filtered (1X) orbit using an existing configuration in Emonitor. It worked correctly in off-route.

I've tried the 2500. It does seem faster than the 1200A but I timed it over a large number of machines and it is n't. Its response is faster to key presses and the spectra appears ealier. But the auto ranging is still slow. The lastest op sys for it allows up to 10 readings per measurement ID and displays a waterfall spectra (just like the Datapac).
Whilst the 2500 is light weight and USB loading unloading is fast and two channel collection speeds things up (you can do this with the 1200 anyway) there are a few basic issues wrong with it.
1) spectra have a long x axis and short y axis the opposite of the current screen shape
2) auto ranging speed settling etc is different for g/se, acceleration and velocity.
3) Still no ability to add/copy a machine in off route mode.
The commtest vb7 and csi 2130 are faster and easier to view (bigger displays)and in my opinion better all round instruments.

Don,

I believe it has single plane balancing as is.
You have to purchase the two plane. Same as DP was.

Dave

Folks,
As a former employee of Rockwell (we were sold off), I have a 1200 and a 2500, as well as 2 dp1500. The dp1500 is still my workhorse. I whole heartedly agree with all of your comments about how late the 'options' are.
I hope they listened to my plea to correct their thinking on the 'modules'.
They were going to have a 'two channel' module. Another module for 2 plane balancing, another for FRF, another for runup, coastdown. They were going to have users pay for a two channel module and then pay again for the others.
My explanation was , the other modules all need two channels! You can't charge someone for a module that is basically useless unless they buy the others.
I guess if I still didn't rely so heavily on my datapac I would know more about the pros and cons of the 2500, but I can't afford to go to the field with an analyzer where the analysis mode can't do an impact, can't do a peak hold averaged spectrum, etc. etc. etc.

I've heard that the datapac is being displaced by the changes in the works for the 2500... any truth to that rumor???

Also, just curious... anyone collecting TWF data and post processing FFTs in Emonitor???

dataPAC is being phased out. That is a fact. You can't buy one, they will still fix one.

Hello All! Thanks again for all the comments. I have contacted Rockwell and the new ops system is suppose to be out the end of this month. This is to fix the current issues and bring it closer to truly replacing the datapac 1500.

The way I understand it the Enpac 2500 does not come with any balancing program and to have a 1-Plane Program you will have to purchase the 2-Plane Balancing Program. To use the 2-Plane program you have to have the 2 Channel upgrade.

A letter that was sent to me last month or so stating the datapac 1500 was obsolete in July 2006. Repairs are available until parts are gone but new 1500's are not available.

Ron, Were you a former employee of Entek or IRD? Rockwell is still Rockwell Automation, right? Businesses are being bought and sold so fast it is hard to keep up.

Don,

Rockwell sold off Reliance motors to Baldor. Ron was on that side of the company.

Dave

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RRS_Dave,

10-4 Dave,
And now Baldor sold off all of the service centers in North America, so we are now Integrated Power Services.

Ron,

Never heard of IPS I don't think
Where are they out of? What is major function now?

Dave

Dave,

Hey there....ae you still testing the EnPac 2500 software? Just wondering if you knew when the release may be coming out. Also I wanted to talk to you about Odyssey and what version software you are currently running.

I have been dealing with Rockwell now for about 4 months and it has been a nightmare to say the least....just wanted to bounce a few questions off you and see if you had/have similar issues.

Regards,
chuck