Sign up Calendar Latest Topics Donate
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Curran919

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 599
Reply with quote  #1 
Its me again with yet another question about definitions...

I was thinking this week that there are really two almost distinct types of machine vibration. I wanted to run this past you guys to see if this was a formal concept so I don't start introducing new terms when there are perfectly good ones I could adopt.

To me, the two categories would be depend on the causal nature of the fault and the vibration.

First would be a fault that leads to vibration. This would comprise predictive maintenance, product health management, prognosticating, whatever you call it. A peakvue value would fall squarely in this category. The vibration itself that contributes to your peakvue signal does not actually pose a risk to any component of the machine, but just indicates that there is something going on with your bearing. If you were to take that same vibration you read at the sensor and instead excite your machine at that point with the same vibration, it would probably not be harmful at all to your machine.

Then there is vibration that leads to a fault. The vibration can be completely by design and really the excitation source is not important until you have to figure out how to mitigate the excitation. However, the vibration can cause a fault in a component different than the excitation source. For example, 1x shaft vibes will lead to accelerated static seal wear.

In some cases, these two concepts will be more closely related, such as in lateral rotordynamics in journal bearings. but in many others, even if vibration causes a fault that then causes further vibration, the effectual and causal vibration are usually fundamentally different. What the hell do you guys call this?
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.