Sign up Calendar Latest Topics Donate
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 3      Prev   1   2   3
Vibe-Rater

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member / Moderator / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 1,398
Reply with quote  #31 
Ralph, the guardian website is the CSI / Emerson portal for all things CSI.  https://guardian.emerson.com/Login/

fburgos

Sr. Member
Registered:
Posts: 670
Reply with quote  #32 
when you subscribe to the sofware agreement yo have access to guardian portal, software updates etc.

https://guardian.emerson.com/
electricpete

Sr. Member
Registered:
Posts: 651
Reply with quote  #33 
Holy cow, that sounds useful!

I just requested an account (waiting for them to email me back).  Thanks for mentioning that (Rang) and helping to unravel some info about that resource  (Ralph and Vibe-rater and fburgos). 

Vibe-Rater

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member / Moderator / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 1,398
Reply with quote  #34 
EP, if you ring them, I am sure they will send you some mouse mats. They have all the contact details on them. Should be localised to where you are. rgds VR
Vibe-Rater

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member / Moderator / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 1,398
Reply with quote  #35 
EP CSI / Emerson are good like that, provided you pay the $$ to sign up.  rgds
Rang

Member
Registered:
Posts: 57
Reply with quote  #36 
I find the guardian portal essential. Click on the Knowledge Base tab 2nd from the left and then do a full text search for the keyword of interest.

The fact that Emerson claim they have a 24hr support hotline that is only manned in the Phillipines during business hours is very poor form given that you are paying nearly $3k a year for software support. It took 3 months for them to resolve my last query on their Epicyclic frequency calculator. I'd encourage every Emerson user to get a Guardian account and use the Knowledge base as often as possible, passing on any feedback. Most articles haven't been updated for years, most don't mention the 2140.

Off topic however, between the MHM Help manual and the KBA's we can manage to build a half decent DB that has Hz based AP sets.
Vibe-Rater

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member / Moderator / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 1,398
Reply with quote  #37 
So Rang, what was the issue with the epi calculator?   I put it through paces on double epis on windfarm gearboxes but did not discover any problems at that time. rgds
Rang

Member
Registered:
Posts: 57
Reply with quote  #38 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vibe-Rater
So Rang, what was the issue with the epi calculator?   I put it through paces on double epis on windfarm gearboxes but did not discover any problems at that time. rgds


So there is nothing wrong with the calculator, just a different philosophy for calculating GMf. We were using a formula - Planet teeth x time for each revolution of the planet relative to the ring. The MHM freq calc uses the time for a revolution of the planet around it's axis. You will get different values, but neither is incorrect. Something to watch out for. We were using formulas provided by three different vendors (Schaeffler, SKF et al), they all gave us the same result. The MHM calc was different.
Danny Harvey

Sr. Member / Moderator / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 1,403
Reply with quote  #39 
The KBA's used to be available for free.  
Vibe-Rater

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member / Moderator / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 1,398
Reply with quote  #40 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rang


So there is nothing wrong with the calculator, just a different philosophy for calculating GMf. We were using a formula - Planet teeth x time for each revolution of the planet relative to the ring. The MHM freq calc uses the time for a revolution of the planet around it's axis. You will get different values, but neither is incorrect. Something to watch out for. We were using formulas provided by three different vendors (Schaeffler, SKF et al), they all gave us the same result. The MHM calc was different.


Hi Rang, just wondering what is different about it.  Surely it should all be the same. I painstakingly tackled the task of epis.  found a link on howstuffworks and then used the mhm calculator to match.  Few years ago now.  The one thing I do remember is the way that mhm calculator alllows for various parts to be stationary - assigning 0 or 1 or -1 etc. rgds
Ron Stiemsma

Sr. Member
Registered:
Posts: 84
Reply with quote  #41 
I mainly use Hz but CPM and orders are only a click away.  If I am in Hz or CPM the harmonic cursor lets me know if it is synchronous or not.  Technology is a wonderful thing.
Vibe-Rater

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member / Moderator / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 1,398
Reply with quote  #42 
Hi Ron, in essence orders are only a click away but sort of not really. What IMO we should all do is collect data in say 0 - 100 to maybe 150x. that gives a good range of seeing all bearing related frequencies regardless of shaft speed and see gearmesh things as well where applicable. electric motors toward the lower end of the scale.  If you have a look at bearing fundamental characteristic frequencies (I hate using the term fault frequencies)  the vast majority fall under 15x.  So 10x that is adequate.  And of course there will be exceptions I am talking vast majority.  And there will of course be gearboxes with high tooth counts. To support that I extracted some several 1000 from the CSI database.  Clearly there are no bearing fundamental frequencies at 200x.

Now TA trained people will jump in and say 3.5 x gearmesh is what should be done.  but if you look at an input shaft then you can see the 3.5x gmesh using the above mentioned anyway you don't have to go such a long way out on the output shaft points. that just crams any potential bearing frequencies in the bottom end of the spectrum.  Your looking at the same gearmesh.  And if you have good resolution then all in the world is good. Apart from the recent passing of Aretha.

Anything higher than that is not so important in my world.  I am sure there will be exceptions.  So for me up to 100 it will be 1600 lines. Above that 150x definitely 3200 lines.

As an aside I do find that people use "acquire spectrum" and go for 12800 lines max setting for CSI.  I find that difficult to deal with. Too much of a good thing I think.  When you try to analyse the x function (CSI) doesn't work well at all anymore) and the cursor movements are so slow.

IMO it is a bit like if you stand back a long way you can only see the sea of green that is the forest.  and if you have a telescope you can see the little lines in each of the trees bark.  There needs to be an appropriate level of magnification to allow seeing what you need to see to detect the faults that we need to see to avoid undesirable down time.  rgds
fburgos

Sr. Member
Registered:
Posts: 670
Reply with quote  #43 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vibe-Rater
Now TA trained people will jump in and say 3.5 x gearmesh is what should be done.  but if you look at an input shaft then you can see the 3.5x gmesh using the above mentioned anyway you don't have to go such a long way out on the output shaft points. that just crams any potential bearing frequencies in the bottom end of the spectrum.



As I remember TA said you should take two spectrum normal bearing 80x 1600lines 4 averages and one special with higher frequency 3.25gmf 3200 lines 8 averages
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.