24583-04 Bently Nevada Condition monitoring card

Description

24583-04 Condition monitoring is, at its core, a planning tool. The goal for systems to be successful is to identify
developing problems on machines at the earliest possible opportunity and then intervene at a point in time
before machine functional failure occurs while minimizing impacts to plant output and getting maximum
useful life out the affected component (such as a bearing or seal) before replacing. This enables machinery
asset management decisions to be made such that problems are addressed/corrected on a planned and
scheduled basis sufficiently in advance of the possibility of failure in service.
Portable data collection systems are the most basic approach to condition monitoring and are discussed
later in this section. They form a part of almost any plantwide condition monitoring implementation, but
are rarely adequate for every asset. Because it is not generally cost-effective to manually gather data from
machinery more than once per month, and because many machines have failure mechanisms that can
progress in seconds or minutes (much faster than monthly data collection intervals), there is a need for online
condition monitoring. The three primary considerations for augmenting an offline system with online condition
monitoring are:
1. The data needs to be collected and evaluated more frequently than it is cost effective for a person to
accomplish this with a portable instrument, or
2. The machine is located in an inaccessible or hazardous area where it is unsafe to send a person to collect
the data, and/or
3. The cost consequences of a machine’s unexpected failure in service justifies the investment.
Many evaluations have been done over the years to justify the investment required to install online condition
monitoring for machines where shorter data collection and evaluation intervals are required. These
evaluations typically result in the determination that if the data is required more frequently than every two
weeks for the program to be effective, then an online system is justified when compared to sending a person
out to collect data with a portable device.
Machine criticality is also rightfully used as a consideration for online versus purely offline condition
monitoring. The more critical the machine, in terms of the cost consequences of unexpected failure in
service, the greater the value of permanently installed condition monitoring technologies. Figure 1 shows the
generalized relationship between cost consequences, the time from malfunction detection to asset failure,
and the recommended corresponding type of condition monitoring

While the adoption of vibration-based protection systems for critical machinery became widespread during
the 1960s and 1970s, condition monitoring during that same period was adopted more slowly because it
was both cumbersome and labor-intensive. For critical machinery, condition monitoring was little more
than strip chart recorders that could automatically trend the readings from the protection systems using
recorder (i.e., 4-20mA) outputs. When a trend indicated a developing problem, benchtop instruments such
as oscilloscopes, spectrum analyzers, and pen plotters were used to capture data from the protection
system and generate plots in an attempt to determine severity and root cause. For assets without machinery
protection systems, condition monitoring involved the use of portable vibration meters that could display but
not store data. The readings were tediously captured manually and then logged on a clipboard using pen
and paper. Trending was an entirely manual exercise and involved transcribing numerical logs—essentially
handwritten tabular data—into graphs.
It was not until the mid-1980s that the route-based portable data collector and trending/analysis software
running on a desktop computer would be introduced. This technology was rapidly adopted by industry as
the first truly practical way to implement condition monitoring and move an organization from reactive,
breakdown or inspection-based maintenance to Predictive Maintenance (PdM). The most common use
case was for an engineer or technician to load routes into the data collector and visit every machine to
collect vibration data for evaluation at monthly or quarterly intervals. The goal was to identify machinery with
internal (i.e., otherwise invisible) damage or degradation so that it could be corrected in advance of surprise
operational failure. While this worked well in many cases, some machinery still experienced failures that could
develop and progress more rapidly than the scheduled route intervals could catch.
Online condition monitoring (OCM) systems collect data at more frequent intervals than is practical with a
portable system. The original OCM systems were developed from portable data collectors with a controllable
multiplexer that was permanently connected to the data collection and evaluation software. The term “online
scanning” describes the periodic nature of a multiplexed system, where sensor channels are “scanned” or
cycled through individually or in small groups. The Bently Nevada Trendmaster System, introduced in the late
1980s, is one example of a scanning architecture. The Ranger Pro, a more modern wireless sensing system,
is another example as each sensor can be programmed to return data to the condition monitoring server in
intervals ranging from as little as every 10 minutes to as much as every 28 days. These systems are “online” in
the sense that they eliminate manual data collection, but the individual channels or sensors are measuring
and returning data to the server only intermittently. As such, many customers refer to these systems as “online
surveillance.” In this document, the terms “surveillance” “intermittent” “periodic” and “scanning” will be used
interchangeably when referring to systems that measure and collect data at intervals measured in minutes
Expected early warning duration
Cost consequences of unexpected failure
Gradual degradation Rapid onset failure
Important Essential Critical

Years Months Weeks Days Hours Minutes Seconds
Walk-around portable
instrumentation
Periodic online
surveillance (scanning)
system
Continuous online
monitoring systems
Figure 1: Recommended condition monitoring approaches as a function of cost consequences and early warning duration
9or longer. In contrast, condition monitoring systems that are capable of returning their data in intervals of
seconds or milliseconds will be referred to as continuous systems. The dividing line between “continuous” and
“intermittent” is somewhat subjective, but still useful in understanding the various offerings and where they
are designed to be used

Details: If you need urgent delivery orders, please feel free to contact us, and we will try our best to meet your needs.
Price problem: If you find that other suppliers offer cheaper prices for the same product, we are also willing to provide you with reference prices and give you further discounts.
Contact Us:+86 18106937731
Whatapp:+86 15359293870
Email: geabbdcs@gmail.com / 2872270648@qq.com
Contact Person: Chen

135785-01 3500/93 Display Unit, non backlighted
135785-02 3500/93 Display Unit, back-lighted
137412-01 3500/93 Manual
135799-01 3500/93 Display Interface Module
135799-02 3500/93 Display Interface Module
(use with A05 option only)
135813-01 3500/93 Display Interface I/O
Module
136634-0010-01 10 Foot (3 metres) Cable (PVC)
136634-0050-01 50 Foot (15 metres) Cable (PVC)
136634-0050-02 50 Foot (15 metres) Cable
(Teflon? )
136634-0100-01 100 Foot (30 metres) Cable (PVC)
136634-0100-02 100 Foot (30 metres) Cable
(Teflon? )
130121-02-01 500 Foot (152 metres) Extension
Cable (PVC)
130121-02-02 500 Foot (152 metres) Extension
Cable (Teflon? )
02200271 External Power Supply for 115 Vac
02200272 External Power Supply for 230 Vac
138227-01 Cable Adapter
146085-01 Power Cable
137224-01 System Mounting Assembly
(sheet metal for A01 & A05
options)
04309007 4-40 X 0.63 Phillips head screw for
System Mounting Assembly, 4 are
required