In the world of vibration monitoring, there exists a great variety of systems with differing capabilities. Aside from different branded systems with a variety of specs and abilities, a distinction can be made between at least four varying types of systems. This can make it difficult for engineers; when to choose which system? In this article we lay out the differences between these systems and which types of applications they fit.
VibSys
VibSys has been developed with a clear purpose in mind: to provide scalable coverage for mid-range assets. It is developed for organizations that want to extend vibration monitoring beyond only the most critical assets, without forcing them into a specific infrastructure or ecosystem.
VibSys enables local deployments, plant integrations, and cloud connectivity. Users can start with the architecture that best fits their operation and later expand their monitoring strategy, if they wish. This leads to the best combination of existing needs and operational flexibility.
VibSys is particularly relevant for balance-of-plant equipment, wind and hydro turbines, pumps, fans and other rotating machinery where continuous monitoring adds value, but where a traditional high-end rack-based protection system may not be the most practical or scalable choice.
More broadly speaking, VibSys is financially accessible, supports continuous data acquisition and is suitable for a wide range of applications. It has a high data resolution with a high number of extractions, supports local outputs, an open ecosystem, and multi-channel integration. Finally, it is AI-ready, utilizing AI to more easily scale up vibration monitoring and first-line analysis efforts.
Wireless sensors
Wireless sensors are more limited in what applications they may be used on since they often have a more limited frequency range. This could also mean that emerging faults in lower and higher frequencies are not detected. Because continuous measurement is energy-intensive, wireless sensors would require continuous battery replacement. This induces high costs as well, which makes their usage for continuous data too costly. Finally, its lower data resolution results in less precise data, which leads to reduced fault detection capability and less accurate diagnostics.
Wireless sensors do, however, provide a medium number of extractions. Their installation process is cheaper, and they are easily scalable.
Wireless sensors best fit when you want a cheap installation process with a remote or hard-to-reach machine, and do not mind intermittent data capture and lower data resolution. Wireless sensors are even the only option for machines which are totally unreachable (for example, in places which cables can’t be physically brought to).
In the field of wireless sensors, things are developing rapidly, which means that the noted differences may be subject to change.
Vibration transmitters
Vibration transmitters are one of the more budget-friendly options. They can measure a broad range of frequencies, which allows them to be applied on a broad range of machinery.
A downside to vibration transmitters is that they can’t support spectra and waveforms for the analysis, limiting the analysis’ usefulness severely. Similarly, vibration transmitters only support continuous data acquisition to a limited extent.
Vibration transmitters are suitable for the lowest range of machinery. They may also be used in non-critical, low-priority machinery, falling in the lower end of the mid-range assets.
Manual measurements
Manual measurements fit well with condition monitoring, with a very high frequency range and data resolution. Similarly, they may be used on every type of machine, with their only limitation being their measurement rate, which may not align well with certain types of machinery.
Another advantage of manual measurements is that an expert will be able to visit a machine. During this visit, what they might hear, feel, or see represents a lot of value for the eventual analysis and possible diagnosis.
A disadvantage of manual measurements is that they cannot provide continuous data. With the usage of experts, this makes it a more time-consuming process compared to other methods.
Manual measurements are best used on critical machinery.
Rack-based systems
Out of all the mentioned systems, rack-based systems are the only ones which allow for SIL-rated protection. With a high channel count, local outputs, high data resolution, and number of extractions, rack-based systems offer a high level of monitoring and protection. They deliver data continuously and support condition monitoring. Rack-based systems are, however, the most expensive option out of the mentioned systems.
Rack-based systems are typically reserved for critical and high-value machinery, where high levels of monitoring and oftentimes protection are required.
Most importantly, the monitoring strategy which you utilize is what matters most, because this determines what system fits with your machinery. To help engineers find the best monitoring strategy, Istec has written the following article: Choosing the right vibration monitoring strategy for your machine — Istec
