CBM Manual

Thank You
for requesting this Condition Based Maintenance Manual. We have attempted to combine the most
informative and important technical papers we could find into a starter manual. We want to assist you in your
implementation of a CBM/PdM program.
TALON Technical Sales, Inc. began operation on March 1, 1990, with a Company Goal to represent technical
product lines in the areas of Physical Measurement (Temperature, Pressure, Force/Weight, Torque, Flow,
Moisture & Vibration), Signal Processing, Indication, Data Acquisition and Control (Hardware and Software) and
products for use in Hazardous Areas for the States of Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana.
TALON Technical Sales, Inc. serves a base of customers that are varied and include:
• Oil & Gas

• Petrochemical & Refining
• Utility
• Food & Pharmaceutical
• Research and Development Companies
• Engineering Firms
• OEM’s
• End Users
TALON Technical Sales, Inc. offers over seventy years of combined experience in Industrial Instrumentation
Application Sales with forty years in the Manufacturers Representative Arena. Product expertise includes:
• Major Physical Measurement Devices

• Signal Conditioning
• Indication
• Control Hardware
• Data Acquisition
• PC Based Hardware and Software
• Fiber Optic Systems
• Power Conditioning/UPS Systems
Customer application satisfaction is Number One in our minds. We will strive to meet the requirements with the
most appropriate instruments available.
TALON Technical Sales

Your Physical Measurement Specialists
15702 West Hardy Road, Suite 200
Houston, TX 77060
Phone: 281-999-8588
Fax: 281-999-6179
Email: info@TALON.biz
WebSite: www.TALON.biz
We want to thank the following companies for the participation and help in assembling this manual.
• Meggitt’s Wilcoxon Research - Accelerometers - Vibration Monitoring - product range was established
when Wilcoxon Research was founded as an independent company in 1960. Created by two scientists
from the David Taylor Naval Research Center (now the Naval Surface Warfare Center), Wilcoxon
Research was founded on two principles that still hold true today: (1) impeccable customer service and
customer satisfaction, and (2) continuous contribution to the field of vibration instrumentation through
research, development and manufacturing of high quality, innovative products.
• Azima DLI - Condition Based Monitoring Products - is the only global machine condition monitoring
company to combine advanced technology, expert analysts and a web delivery model that provides
plant managers with knowledge they need to ensure machinery uptime and reduced maintenance
cost.
• Nanmac - Temperature Measurement & Instrumentation - has been a leader in temperature

measurement and control for industrial and research applications for over 50 years. They have
achieved this by working cooperatively with their customers on four continents to provide the highest
performance in standard-custom sensors and hardware related to temperature measurement.
CONDITION
BASED
MONITORING
A compilation of technical articles and papers prepared by:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• You Don’t Have to Know Vibration to Benefit
your Process
• Why Do Predictive Maintenance Programs
Fail?
• From Near or Far – An Overview of Remote
Machine Condition Assessment
• Cost Effective Predictive Maintenance
Solutions
• 12 Things to Consider …
• Installation Guide for Hazardous Areas (to be
Updated 5/2011
Updated)
• Accelerometer Mounting/ Hardware &
Installation
• Cost of Run – To – Failure
• Temperature Sensor Basics
• Thermocouple Standards
• Selecting the “Right” Thermocouple
• Thermocouples in Furnaces and Ovens
• Thermocouples and Extension Grade Wires
• Eliminate Temperature Errors Caused By
Conduction
• The Stem Effect
You don’t have to be a vibration expert, 2006
You don’t have to know vibration to

benefit your process
Even if you aren’t a vibration expert, you can monitor
critical machinery vibration levels using sensors and
transmitters that run on common 4-20 mA loops.
© Wilcoxon Research. This document and the information in it is confidential and is the property of Wilcoxon Research. It may not be
copied or disclosed to a third party or used for any purpose other than that for which it is supplied without the express written consent of
Wilcoxon Research.
Information contained in this document may be subject to Export Control Regulations of the European Union, USA or other
countries. Each recipient of this document is responsible for ensuring that transfer or use of any information contained in this document
complies with all relevant Export Control Regulations.
Machinery health monitoring is critical to

every plant's reliability program.
Regardless of your process
Pharmaceutical Petrochemical
Food and beverage Pulp and paper
Brewing Power generation
Water and waste water
Wilcoxon has experience working with manufacturers in these businesses.
2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

P2
Machinery health monitoring is critical to

every plant's reliability program.
Regardless of your application
Pumps Cooling towers

Motors Compressors
Fans Gear boxes
You need machinery health monitoring to evaluate machine condition and perform
predictive maintenance.

P3
Machine monitoring is a vital part of maintenance

programs that reduce costs and downtime
Using preventative and predictive maintenance technologies to track
machine health is a proven industry best practice. By monitoring
machinery health, outages and downtime are reduced, and you save
money.
Maintenance indicators can be examined through vibration analysis, oil
analysis, infrared (thermal) monitoring, motor circuit evaluation, and
ultrasonic monitoring.
Maintenance indicators are used to examine machines while they are
running. Without interfering with a machine’s normal operation, you can
effectively estimate the machine health.

P4
Why choose vibration data?
Vibration monitoring has been one of the anchors of predictive technologies

because it can detect several causes of machinery fault.
You can use vibration monitoring to detect:
Shaft misalignment
Rotor imbalance
Gear failure, and
Bearing faults.
Trending vibration data allows you to monitor
machinery and detect these faults, even if you
aren’t a vibration expert.

P5
Benefits of vibration trending

Trended data is obtained during loop-powered monitoring and provides 4-20 mA output that
indicates overall machine health with no analysis required.
Provides converted output of raw vibration data into 4-20 mA data

which can be integrated with your plant DCS/PLC.
This pre-processing allows operators to focus on trends in the data.
Trended data can give useful advanced warning (1 month to 3 months)
of equipment failures.
Simple alarm limits can be set.
Spectral data is usually available as well, and can be accessed to
diagnose problems.

P6
4-20 mA data addresses your needs

You already have the PLC / DCS network installed, you are already taking data points
on pressure, temperature, or maybe flow. Now you can get vibration data as well.
Budgets continue to be squeezed.

“Do more with less” is the mantra of today’s business environment.
Minimize complex analysis - operators can focus on trends in the data,
you don’t need a vibration expert.
Variety of options
⎯ Loop Powered Sensors can output 4-20 mA data and also
make dynamic vibration data available
⎯ Vibration transmitters can use your existing sensor
infrastructure to trend raw vibration data
⎯ Sensors and transmitters interface with vibration alarms or
your existing PLC or DCS for immediate notification of
extreme vibrations
P7
What is needed to start a new vibration

trending program?
Wilcoxon Loop Powered Sensors (LPS®) are
available in configurations for virtually every use.
Our dedicated team will help you determine
which sensors are best for your application.
Mount sensors to machines at the bearings.
Use simple shielded, twisted pair cable – similar
to wiring for other 4-20 mA devices – to wire
sensors to a PLC or DCS analog input.
The LPS® output is based on overall vibration,
you don’t have to be a vibration expert to
interpret the data.

P8
Where do the sensors mount?

4-20 mA Loop Powered Sensors for vibration trending mount at the bearing location
Horizontal mounting is preferred for pedestal

supports.
Axial mounting may be used at the thrust
bearing location.
Wilcoxon application guides offer detailed
mounting information.

P9
How do the sensors mount?

LPS® Sensors require a permanent mount on the machine to generate consistent
measurements and provide data for trending.
Cementing pad on machine

surface, or
Drill and tap on machine
surface
SF 8 cementing pad SF 6 stud

P 10
Who analyzes the data?

Sample trended data from a 4-20 mA LPS®
Data “analysis” is not necessary.

20
The trend of the vibration provides 18
guidance for millwrights or 16
14
mechanics. 12
10
The vibration changes will indicate 8
machines that require attention. 6
4
Contact Wilcoxon to discuss your 2
needs and application and to 0
determine if detailed vibration 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
analysis is necessary. Output over time in months

P 11
When is maintenance required?

Since 4-20 mA data does not have to be analyzed by an expert, there are general
guidelines on when maintenance should be performed.
When vibration changes are
gradual, maintaining a more Example of ISO 10816 vibration recommendations
frequent watch over the machine
will usually suffice.
Use a sensor such that the
baseline is ~15% of full scale. An
increase by 2.5x the baseline
requires immediate action.
ISO 10816, Mechanical vibration --
Evaluation of machine vibration by
measurements on non-rotating
parts, is a guideline that advises
typically acceptable vibration
levels.

P 12
Simplified Condition Monitoring
Trended data can be used for critical assets

when no vibration monitoring program exists,
or for the balance of plant machinery that is
not currently being monitored.
The ability to trend data on motors, pumps,
fans, and gearboxes allows you to maximize
your resources.
It’s not a new concept, just a practical,
cost effective approach.

P 13
What’s the cost impact ?
Depending on your needs and specific application, your cost per

monitoring point – including a 4-20mA LPS® sensor with a 64 foot cable
and sensor connector – may be as low as $363.

P 14
Can LPS® sensors withstand the harsh plant

environment?
Wilcoxon’s LPS® sensors are hermetically sealed and use cases

machined from 316L stainless steel.
The cables and connectors recommended for use with the LPS® sensors
use materials with good chemical resistance.
All LPS® sensors are rated for continuous use up to 85°C (185°F).
All LPS® sensors are Helium Leak Tested to insure a true hermetic seal,
providing you excellent MTBF.

P 15
What about special applications?
FM, CSA, SIMTARS, and ATEX

certification are available.
LPS® sensors are available with
intrinsically safe and explosion proof ratings.
Top exit, side exit, integral cable, stainless
steel braid are just some of the many options
available with the LPS® series.
Dual-output of temperature and vibration
data is offered.
If you have a special application which
requires special certification, let us know the
details of your needs.

P 16
Control your process with simple vibration

monitoring
Wilcoxon’s TLC (Total Lower Cost of Ownership)
offers you a way to monitor your process with
vibration monitoring, even if you aren’t a vibration
expert.
Wilcoxon has a global reputation for providing the
best industrial sensors on the market.
Some of our customers are the leaders in their
markets – you know them by name.

P 17
Wilcoxon Customer Sales & Service
301 330 8811
sensors@wilcoxon.com

P 18

P 19
Confidentiality agreement
The information contained in this document is the property of Wilcoxon Research and is confidential
and/or copyright material. This information and this document may not be used or disclosed without the
express authorization of Wilcoxon Research. Any unauthorized use or disclosure may be unlawful. The
information contained in this document may be subject to the provisions of the Export Administration Act
of 1979 (50 USC 2401-2420), the Export Administration Regulations promulgated thereunder (15 CFR
730-744], and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR 120-130). The recipient
acknowledges that these statutes and regulations impose restrictions on import, export, re-export and
transfer to third countries of certain categories of data, technical services and information, and that
licenses from the US Department of State and/or the US Department of Commerce may be required
before such data, technical services and information can be disclosed. By accepting this document, the
recipient agrees to comply with all applicable governmental regulations as they relate to the import,
export and re-export of information.

P 20
Why Do Predictive Maintenance Programs
Fail?
by Alan Friedman
In the past few years we have witnessed a marked change in predictive maintenance (PdM)
practices whereby more and more companies are choosing to outsource their programs. While
many facilities routinely calculate 20:1 return on investment metrics, others cynically refer to
aging data collectors as “dust collectors” or use them as bookends.
Although the concept of PdM is now widely known, and its potential benefits generally
accepted, many plants have failed to successfully exploit the available techniques and
technologies in practice. This state of affairs begs the question: “Why do some programs
succeed while others fail?”
As we enter a recession and maintenance staffs are cut, we will once again be asked to do more
with less. This means that now we need to think about how we conduct maintenance and
determine how to do it more efficiently and intelligently in the future whether that is through
new internal processes or outside help. As we rise to meet the challenges of the emerging
economy, we implement best practices, restructure, invest in infrastructure and are prepared to
hit the ground running when the economy turns upwards again.
In the coming months, I will be writing a number of articles addressing the subject of why PdM
programs succeed or fail from the managerial, technical and financial perspectives. Whether one
decides to use this information to beef up or restart an in-house program, determine what type of
training may be best or to outsource some, or all, of these functions, the hope is to provide
enough practical information to help you be successful in your endeavor. The article you are
reading now will touch on some of the main themes that we will be exploring in more detail in
the future.
Lack of Vision
No program can succeed if it is not well conceived. If done correctly, a predictive maintenance
program should change the culture, philosophy and work flow of the maintenance department. It
is not just the addition of a new technology or tool, but a different approach or strategy towards
maintaining one’s assets. This approach is being undertaken in order to gain specific benefits that
can and should be measured. These benefits include: increased uptime, reduced failures, shorter
planned outages, fewer preventive maintenance actions and, ultimately, a more efficient facility.
Failure to adapt the culture to this new philosophy, and benchmark the gains, will eventually lead
to the program’s dissolution. Adopting new technologies without changing maintenance
strategies will not produce the desired benefits.
1
Using a Tool without Understanding Why
Many facilities purchase a new technology, such as a vibration data collector or alignment tool,
spend time and money learning how to use the tool, but little time understanding why it is being
used. As an example, a particular facility I know of had the capacity and ability to detect
incipient bearing wear in a pump using a vibration analysis system. Although the pump showed
no signs of wear, the facility went ahead and changed out the bearings according to their
preventive maintenance schedule. At another plant, a vibration analyst was adept at detecting
mechanical faults in his plant’s machinery, but he was afraid to tell his supervisor about all of the
problems he found because his supervisor might get angry at having to repair all of these
machines! Both of these cases demonstrate the use of the technology as an end in itself without
an overall vision of why the technology is being employed.
Failure to Justify the Program
In those facilities where the technology is being used correctly, and in the right context, I have
often seen a program fail because its successes were not adequately documented. This is to say
that the facility changed their philosophy to a predictive mode, correctly employed technology to
reduce preventive maintenance actions and minimized catastrophic failures, but they failed to
adequately document the efficiencies and savings associated with these actions. So, while
employees within the maintenance department acknowledged that their work was useful, they
had no data to prove this to those outside of their group. Sadly, they then saw their program get
cut when managers had to tighten their budgets. In other cases, the person managing the PdM
program left and no one picked up the ball.
Lack of Consistency
Another component of a failed program is the lack of consistency over time. There are many
causes for this, ranging from a failure to commit adequate personnel, lack of proper training, loss
of skilled personnel, change in program direction/technology, failure to adequately define the
program at the start and, finally, the lack of a consistent model to monitor the efficacy of the
program over time. These false starts and stops add confusion to the process and typically result
in a lack of faith by the workers who see the company invest in “change”, but then quickly revert
back to old patterns.
A lack of consistency over time has the additional ill effects of not allowing the facility to
“evolve” to a proactive maintenance mode. As a brief review, there are four levels of
maintenance practices: run-to-failure, preventive, predictive and proactive. In run-to-failure
programs, facilities adopt a technology, such as vibration analysis, to test or troubleshoot
machines they know have problems. Preventive mode refers to maintenance departments that test
machines on a schedule much like a preventive maintenance task, but do not act on the
information gleaned from these tests. In predictive maintenance mode, one bases maintenance
actions on the results of these tests to eliminate unnecessary preventive actions and avoid
catastrophic failures.
2
The next stage in maintenance evolution is the proactive mode, whereby the facility has enough
historical information about the machines and their failure modes to make educated decisions on
how to extend their lives, replace them with machines of different makes or models or weed out
inherent design flaws. To reach these lofty goals and bask in the glory of a highly efficient plant,
one needs the backbone of an historically consistent program to lean on.
Looking at these evolutionary stages from a qualitative viewpoint, one will note that a plant in
run-to-failure mode will contain machinery in various states of disrepair that seem to fail at
random. Personnel in a runto- failure plant will often be “busy” and may think that they are too
busy to adopt new procedures! In the preventative mode, one is taking better care of one’s assets
and they are failing less frequently. In predictive mode, one should be able to reduce preventive
actions where applicable, extend machine life and drastically and reduce unplanned outages. In
proactive mode, one will have removed or redesigned troubled machinery and will have a plant
that operates smoothly, predictably and efficiently over time. To attain this goal, consistency is
required over a long period of time.
Training and Partnering
Ongoing training is an important ingredient of a successful program. However, it needs to be the

correct type of training, a combination of complimentary technology and managerial expertise.
ISO and ASNT-certified vibration courses focus on machine dynamics and vibrations on a
general technical level. It is important to take these courses, pass the exams and become
certified, but this training alone will not necessarily translate to running a successful PdM
program.
Equipment vendor training is often useful because it requires trainees to learn how to use a data
collector and correctly set up software, but oftentimes does not expand outside these topics to
provide the user with the tools he or she needs to run a successful program. While learning how
to use data collection tools is an essential skill, it defeats the purpose if that same person does not
know what to do with the data they’ve collected or how to manage a successful PdM program.
One last note to consider about equipment vendor training: once the training has been completed,
there is often no one around to ensure employees are using the tool correctly.
Onsite training, database reviews, program audits and choosing the correct long term partner, or
PdM service provider, will go a long way to ensuring a successful program. If done correctly, a
service partner will provide onsite training and support in managing your ongoing program in
different capacities as your program evolves. At different times and in different circumstances, a
good partner will take over parts of the program for you and later provide training and support as
you bring the program back in-house.
Lack of Procedures / Methodology
As alluded to in the last section, a successful monitoring program is more than just interpreting
graphs and data, it depends on consistency and repeatable performance. In general, we are
interested in monitoring assets in order to diagnose deteriorating health or other problems. In
3
order to do this correctly and accurately, one needs to test the assets in a repeatable fashion,
month after month and year after year for many years. When this is understood, one will see that
a successful program depends much more on consistency and program management
(unfortunately, this aspect is not often taught in standardized courses) than it does on technical
prowess. Another way of stating this is to say that a successful program depends on methodology
and organization. A good partner or service provider with a good track record should be able to
help you implement a program with tried and true methodologies and manage it for you.
Lack of Experience / Commitment
So far, we have touched on a number of different aspects of successful and unsuccessful

programs, and it may be clear that there are a lot of issues involved. This highlights another
problem, which is simply a lack of experience and/or commitment by a particular facility. Even
if one has the best intentions and the highest level of commitment, it may take a long time to
train an employee or group of employees to the point where they can implement a good
maintenance program. In the meantime, as they are learning, little may be happening or things
may be going in the wrong direction.
More typically, one will see a facility trying to accomplish a great deal without dedicating any
money or people to the project or, when they do dedicate one or the other, it is only for a short
period of time. Within this window, corporate priorities change, personnel change positions and,
subsequently, the program gets shelved. Like many things in today’s world, PdM is becoming a
highly specialized area of expertise where, if one wants to gain the depth and expertise currently
existing in the market place, it takes a great deal of dedication and time, which , unfortunately,
may not be compatible with the other 100 duties you are expected to take care of as part of your
other work. This is one reason why partnering or outsourcing has become a viable option for
many organizations.
Conclusion
Having gone through this brief exercise, perhaps it is becoming apparent why there are
advantages to outsourcing PdM programs. And, while many companies have the expertise in-
house to develop and sustain high quality PdM programs, there are also many companies who
might benefit more, or at least benefit more quickly, by outsourcing their predictive maintenance
programs. It is a decision that each organization needs to explore for themselves.
Service providers understand the context in which their technology is being employed and many
have an enormous amount of experience in successfully managing large programs over extended
periods of time. They know what is required to make a program succeed and can educate you
and your staff on these points. A service provider should maintain a consistent approach over
time and be able to maintain the appropriate expertise within their company, in part because their
people completely believe in the technology they are employing. They will be experts at utilizing
the tools and technology at their disposal, but this should take a backseat to their track record on
managing long-term programs. Lastly, a service provider should be able to work with you to
4
benchmark the program and demonstrate its return on investment over time.
In future articles, we will explore these topics in greater depth to provide you with enough
practical information to run a better in-house program or find an appropriate partner or service
provider to help take it off your hands. In either case, understanding why things fail is the key to
understanding how to get them to work!
5
Why PdM Programs Fail: Personnel Issues
By Alan Friedman
Many facilities and enterprises have failed to achieve the 10:1, 20:1 or even 30:1 Return on
Investment (ROI) often promised with the introduction of a Predictive Maintenance (PdM)
program. Investments have been made in monitoring equipment and training but, unfortunately
in many instances, data collectors are now collecting dust on a shelf in some storeroom waiting
for someone to rediscover them. And perhaps the discoverer will wonder what these artifacts
may have been used for. Meanwhile, on the factory floor, it is back to business as usual with
unplanned outages as the norm, with everyone too busy fighting fires to get a handle on the
situation. Well, at least it's an exciting place to work!
This article will focus primarily on the personnel aspects of how a PdM program could
potentially fail. Let's start from scratch, pretending that we have no PdM program and we want
to start one now. This brings us to the first problem: how many times have we had to pretend
that we had no program and now we are starting from scratch all over again - maybe with new
equipment this time around - because the guy who used to run the program left for greener
pastures and took everything with him except for a squarish-looking electronic device with some
cables and a sensor hanging off of it? If we are honest, most companies have probably given the
PdM program thing at least one try.
Retention
Retention of highly trained personnel can be a problem. While many are retiring, others are
either promoted or make lateral moves to other companies. The impact of these moves is
especially devastating when individuals do not formalize their work into processes and
procedures that other people can be trained to follow when they leave. Unfortunately, many
workers like to be "experts" and protect their position by shrouding their work in mystery,
holding onto the secrets of their expertise to ensure that the company remains dependent on
them. Others may be less devious or insecure, but simply don't think ahead. In other words,
they don't establish procedures so the company can keep the program running in their eventual
absence. In either case, we can say for certain that the loss of the resident expert is often enough
to doom a PdM program, and banish its high tech equipment to the unreachable parts of the
highest shelves.
The lesson here is that you should catalog work procedures and processes now. Formalizing
procedures is one of the best steps you can take to not only enhance the effectiveness of your
program, but also to institutionalize it, so that the program becomes bigger than one person, or
even a handful of people. It can then survive the loss of key personnel.
Training
Let's say that we are going to give it another try. How long will it take to train the new resident
expert, or experts, to the point where they have a handle on the technology and can effectively
6
manage a PdM program? One year? Two? Five years?
Here is another very important question to ponder. Will we view PdM responsibilities as a full-
time position or just something "extra" that has to be done after the "real" work is complete?
Will this person's manager give them the time, training and equipment necessary to make them
successful, or will the PdM program be seen as just another responsibility added to an already
busy schedule? Remember, when a plant is operating without an effective PdM program,
unplanned failures and a general lack of knowledge about the condition of the plants' assets are a
given. Therefore, maintenance people are constantly operating in "firefighter" mode to fix the
next emerging fire.
In this situation, it is difficult to step back and put together a strategy to move up the
maintenance evolutionary ladder to the rung of PdM. In order to step back and do this, the
person we appoint to help with this process (a.k.a. our new PdM expert-in-training), needs to be
given the time, space and support to make the transition happen, which shouldn't be expected to
happen overnight.
Basic Direction
This leads us to the next potential problem, which is that this person, or people, may not actually
have the expertise to help the plant evolve into high quality PdM practices. Even if we assume
the plant is ready to offer time and resources to support the PdM program moving forward, they
still need someone in place who knows which direction forward really is!
A lack of technical skills and vision has been another thorn in the side of many an in-house PdM
program. Running an effective PdM program requires a good deal of contextual knowledge that
helps engineers make the right choices about the appropriate technology to use within a myriad
of variables - industries, sites, processes and circumstances both environmental and
technological. And gathering the data correctly is only the first, and many might ague the easiest
step. Correctly analyzing the data gathered is at least equally as important, and deciding the
proper actions to take from looking at the data requires a good deal of practice and experience.
Often, PdM managers can spend too much time looking at vibration spectra and not enough time
assessing the PdM program as a whole. But this is not necessarily the fault of the person or
people chosen to do this work. I believe it is simply a failure to realize the level of expertise in
these matters that exists out there in the marketplace, compared to the level of expertise we may
be able to develop within our facility - especially when companies keep losing our their experts.
So, the bottom line here is that it is essential to provide adequate training and time for personnel
to gain the knowledge and experience required to run an effective in-house PdM program. It can
be done, and can be done well. However, if companies aren't willing or able to provide the time
and resources to develop this expertise in-house, they should not be considering an in-house
7
program.
Strategic Direction
One last item worth mentioning is the problem of abrupt changes in strategic direction. I have
seen successful programs uprooted by managers who, when initially hired, appear on the scene
with no knowledge of PdM and do one of two things. They either fire their staff that is
responsible for these tasks or they don't give the staff the time or permission to continue working
on their programs. To be sure, this problem is more common in circumstances where the people
running the PdM program have not adequately documented the efficacy of their work (i.e. they
do not have the evidence handy to make a case for why the plant is better off keeping these
programs in place).
Trends
In recent years, we have seen a shift in the PdM industry towards outsourcing PdM activities to
companies who have a long track record of successfully managing these sorts of programs as
well as the technical expertise to solve difficult problems. Some reasons for this shift has been
touched on in this article; namely the difficulty a facility can have in hiring, training and
retaining individuals who have the depth of experience needed to turn the advertised potential
ROI PdM can provide into real results and real money. Even those facilities that have seen
substantial gains in evolving their maintenance efforts from Reactive Maintenance to PdM may
abruptly devolve back into firefighter maintenance mode with the loss of a key expert or because
of a change in direction taken by a manager unfamiliar with the benefits of PdM.
One solution to these common problems is to team up with a well-established service provider
who takes on the responsibility for keeping the program consistent year after year. A quality
strategic partner will have the necessary expertise, not only with the PdM technologies, but also
in knowing how to strategically deploy them so that they positively affect the company's bottom
line.
8
Why PdM Programs Fail: Misuse of Technology
by Alan Friedman
A very good mechanic knows that you need the right tool for the job, but a common problem
with PdM programs is that sometimes people acquire the tool before fully understanding what
problem needs to be fixed. Of course, when you have a hammer all of your problems look like
nails, and what follows from this mistaken view is a whole list of reasons why PdM programs
fail. The biggest lesson I learned from engineering school is that the solution to a problem is
most often found in its correct definition. That is, solutions become obvious when you really
understand what the problem is.
We laugh when we read the exchange between the tech support person and the new computer
owner who calls to say his wireless Internet is not working. After the tech support person
laboriously goes through all of the steps to verify that the hardware and software are all installed
and functioning, she asks who the person's Internet service provider is - and, in the pregnant
pause that follows, we suddenly know what the real problem is!
One reason PdM programs fail is because the goals of the program are not well defined or well
understood. A company purchases a technology like a vibration analysis system or infrared
camera and then they get trained to use the tool, but not what to use it for. What they often fail
to do is change processes and procedures in the plant to take advantage of the information this
new tool provides. In other words, you buy a screwdriver, you learn how to loosen and tighten
screws but you somehow fail to see how this does or doesn't relate to the plant's overall
operation.
So, what are the goals of a successful program? Depending on your background, experience or
role in your organization, you may have differing ideas about this, but how you view this will
have a large impact on how you employ the technology and on the sorts of benefits you will
receive. It will also ultimately dictate your view of what is the best tool for the job. To reiterate,
I believe that the failure of many PdM programs can be traced back directly to confusion or
disagreement on this core question: what is the goal of the program? Why are we purchasing
this tool (or service), how will we use it and how will we measure our success? In many cases,
the tools are purchased before these questions are answered, if they are ever answered. In other
cases, the benefits one hopes to achieve are not in line with how the technology is actually being
employed.
Let's consider two common viewpoints regarding the goals of a vibration analysis program. One
typical view is that vibration analysis is one of the best non-destructive technologies available to
detect and diagnose mechanical faults and degradation in rotating machinery. The goal of using
the technology is to detect and diagnose faults in rotating machinery - period.
Another common view is that because vibration analysis can be used to detect wear in rotating
machines, one can utilize this machinery condition information to better plan maintenance
actions. This leads to an increase in uptime, quality and plant performance and a decrease in
unplanned maintenance, catastrophic failures and accidents. These benefits, loosely defined as
9
Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE), lead to higher profitability. In this view, the lofty goal
of the vibration analysis program is higher plant profitability.
This is the crux of many failed programs. Perhaps a manager agrees to purchase a vibration
monitoring system or a monitoring service. In his mind, he imagines a 30:1 return on his
investment. Maybe he hasn't thought it completely through, but when he considers the benefits
of such a system, his mind leans towards the goal of higher profitability. He has read plenty of
articles about condition monitoring and profitability and he is sold on the idea of it. Now, a
product has been purchased, some technicians and engineers have been given some training, but
they understand the goal differently. They use the equipment to detect problems in their rotating
machinery; perhaps they even become quite skilled at it. But beyond this, no organizational
changes have been implemented to schedule maintenance based on vibration test results, nor
have metrics been introduced to calculate and measure the impact of the technology on uptime
and spare parts and, ultimately, its impact on the bottom line.
From the point of view of the engineers and technicians using the system, it appears successful.
They are able to troubleshoot machines and diagnose problems but imagine what happens when
a recession hits and upper management goes around looking for programs to cut. How will these
technicians make the case that their vibration program should be preserved? Where is the 30:1
ROI? This is one major cause of terminated PdM programs. The original idea was to impact the
bottom line, but the technology was actually used in a more limited fashion. The organizational
and procedural changes required to utilize machine condition information to meet the goal of
higher profitability were not implemented.
Another issue is the tool itself, the actual equipment or service that one purchases. If we
consider the two separate goals mentioned above, it will soon be obvious that the equipment we
purchase, and how we use the equipment, will vary based on our goal. Again, I will reiterate that
most people purchase the equipment first and never fully reconcile the goal.
Here is a common scenario that describes a plant using vibration analysis to troubleshoot
machines and determine what is wrong with them. The plant either has a vibration expert on-site
or uses an outside consultant. Typically, someone hears a weird noise coming from a machine or
they feel that the machine is vibrating too much. Maybe the machine keeps failing unexpectedly
or seems to have more problems than a similar unit. Whatever it is, someone in the maintenance
department believes there is a problem, and so they call the vibe guy to troubleshoot it.
The on-site expert or consultant will require customizable high tech equipment that allows him to
set up a variety of special tests to troubleshoot the machine. The data collection equipment may
have a big screen because the analyst will do a lot of his analysis on the plant floor. The
equipment may also have many channels and it will likely be complex and difficult to use.
Because there is no historical data, the focus will not be on trending or looking for changes over
time, therefore, his equipment will not require any advanced alarming or trending capabilities. It
would not be uncommon to expect the analyst to spend multiple hours or even multiple days in
some cases, diagnosing the problem and submitting his report. This would most likely be a
costly, but hopefully, infrequent expense.
10
Summary Scenario #1
Data collector needs:

• Big screen
• Many test types
• Customizable, multi-channel, magnet mounted sensors
• Intelligence in the analyzer
Does not need:

• Alarming
• Trending
• Reporting
• Intelligent software
Analyst:
• Highly trained
• Highly paid
• Experienced
Program manager:
• Not much program management required
Now let's consider that the goal of the program is to use the technology to better plan
maintenance, ultimately leading to a measurable impact on plant profitability. What type of
equipment will be best suited to meet this goal?
In this next scenario, the emphasis is placed on trending because the goal is to look for changes
in machine condition and then base maintenance decisions on this information. Time is spent up
front defining standard test conditions and organizing the program. This scenario calls for a low
cost, efficient worker to collect data in exactly the same way, day in and day out, year after year
on the same equipment. The data collection equipment would be "idiot proof" with limited or
controlled options for the user, or it may be an online system. Test points on the machine would
be screw type sensor pads or installed targets for magnet mounts to insure repeatability.
Initiation of a standard test should take no more than a button press. Because the data collection
tasks, including the required equipment, have been defined in such a way as to ensure repeatable,
relevant and historical data, there is no reason for the person collecting the data to look at or
analyze the data on the plant floor. This eliminates the need for the data collector's big screen.
The software will have to be very good at looking at trend data in an efficient way because this
scenario also calls for testing most of the plant's machines frequently, not only machines with
known problems. Therefore, the analysis software will require the sophistication, not the data
collector. There won't be time (or need) for an analyst to spend multiple hours looking at data
11
from each machine; a couple of minutes will be enough to see if the condition has changed, a
couple more will be needed to understand how it's changed and to update the status and add a
recommendation in the software. Additionally, because trends based on good data should
provide enough information to meet the goals of this scenario, the data collector will not require
the capability to perform advanced customized tests, nor will the technician collecting the data
require much training.
Lastly, since this scenario is concerned with improving maintenance decisions and relating them
to the bottom line, the software should be part of a larger CMMS package or Plant Asset
Management program. Linking results to business goals such as improvements in uptime,
quality and plant performance allow maintenance managers to accurately quantify their impact
on profitability.
Summary Scenario #2
Data collector:
• Easy to use
• Human error proof
• Simple, standard tests or online system
Data collector doesn't need:

• Big screen
• Complex customized tests
Sensor:
• Triaxial sensor and stud mount
Software:
• Intelligent software
• Good alarming
• Trending and reporting features
• Links to CMMS and asset management software
• Metrics calculated from maintenance decisions up to plant profitability
User:
• Data collection technician
• Low skill
• Low wage
Program manager:
• High skill
• High wage
As you can see, the way we define the goal has a big impact on the type of equipment we will
purchase and how this equipment is used. It also points to a common reason why PdM programs
12
fail. People often buy the equipment with the most bells and whistles first, with little to no
attention on the software and no idea how the monitoring program will be organized. This is to
say they buy the equipment defined in the first scenario with a vague idea that they will receive
the rewards of using it as described in the second scenario. They focus more on the tool than on
program management. When they receive training from the equipment vendor, it is often
training in how to use the tool, not what to use the tool for. People who fall into this trap will
typically say that they only test "critical" machines, not understanding that they are doing this
because they bought equipment that was not designed to test large numbers of machines
efficiently.
Now let's return to the original question: Why do PdM programs fail? One reason that I hope is
clear by now is the possible confusion between condition monitoring tools and their
accompanying goals. The most common stumbling blocks are in understanding what the
business goals are, employing the right tools, people and processes to meet those goals and
establishing metrics to show how effective the program is in reaching the goals. Often times,
plants employ highly trained individuals to use complex equipment solely to troubleshoot
machines that are already known to be problematic. This may be a valid use of the technology,
but it is not PdM and does not bring the same rewards or ROI. If you begins with the stated goal
of increasing profitability and work down the ladder from there, equipment purchases and the
way these tools are employed will be very different and the profitability goal will be better
realized.
Alan Friedman is a senior technical advisor for Azima DLI (www.AzimaDLI.com). With more
than 18 years of engineering experience, Friedman has worked with hundreds of industrial
facilities worldwide and developed proven best practices for sustainable condition monitoring
and predictive maintenance programs. Friedman contributed to the development of Azima DLI's
automated diagnostic system and has produced and taught global CAT II and CAT III equivalent
vibration analysis courses. Friedman is a senior instructor at the Mobius Institute, an
independent provider of vibration training and certification, and an instructor for the Instituto
Mexicano de Mantenimiento Predictivo (Predictive Maintenance Institute of Mexico). He is also
the founder of ZenCo, a positive vibrations company. You can contact Alan at 206-327-3332 or
at friedmanalan1@gmail.com
©2010 Reliabilityweb.com
13
Cost effective
predictive maintenance solutions
Machinery health monitoring is critical to every plant
Machineryprogram
reliability health monitoring is critical to every plant’s
Using preventative and predictive maintenance technologies to track machine health is a proven industry best
practice. By monitoring machinery health, you save money.
• Increase operational efficiency

• Reduce outages and downtime
• Save time with less data collection
• Decrease spares inventory
Vibration monitoring has been one of the anchors of predictive technologies because it can detect several causes
of machinery fault. Do your plant machines ever suffer from shaft misalignment, rotor imbalance, gear failure
or bearing fault? Trending vibration data allows you to monitor machines and detect these faults, even if you are
not a vibration expert.
Regardless of your application Regardless of your process

• Pumps Pharmaceutical
• Motors Food and beverage
• Fans High tech fabrication
• Cooling towers Water and waste water
• Compressors Petrochemical
• Gear boxes Pulp and paper
Power generation
You need machinery health monitoring to evaluate machine condition and perform predictive maintenance.
Utilizing 4-20 mA vibration data
Simplified condition monitoring

Trended data can be used for critical assets when no vibration monitoring program exists or for the balance of
plant machinery that is not currently being monitored
Maximize your resources and reduce walk around time by only visiting problem machines
It’s not a new concept, just a practical, cost effective approach
Vibration trending is observing vibration data over time. The overall level of vibration is represented by a loop
current of 4-20 mA, with 4 mA representing no vibration and 20 mA representing sensor full scale vibration level.
This loop current indicates general machine health with no complex analysis required.
If you already have a process control system that accepts 4-20 mA inputs - like a PLC or DCS network - you are
already taking data points on pressure, temperature, or maybe flow. Now you can send vibration data to your PLC
or DCS as well. Using vibration trending you do not need vibration expertise or expensive vibration analysis software.
A clear trend
20
18
16
14
Loop current (mA)
12
10
Time
This graph represents data from a pump experiencing cavitations. A clear upward trend in the data
shows the value and simplicity of trended data.
Benefits of vibration trending

• Spectrum analysis is not necessary
• Pre-processing allows you to focus on trends in the data
• Simple alarm limits can be set
• 4-20 mA data goes right to your plant process control system where trends are easy to see
• Changes in vibration levels typically warn you within 1 to 3 months of equipment failures
• Spectral data is available as well, and can be accessed to diagnose problems
3
Sensors and transmitters
Loop powered sensors
Wilcoxon’s line of 4-20 mA loop powered sensors, the LPSTM Series, consists of an accelerometer and signal conditioner
in one sensor. The 4-20 mA LPSTM are available with a host of options to meet every application:
• Top connector or side connector for lower clearance; side connector sensors available with integral cable
• Selectable full scale for every motor speed, fan speed, etc
• Custom frequency banding
• Output signals of peak, true peak or rms can represent either velocity or acceleration
• Integral temperature sensor provides critical data for temperature-sensitive operations
• Intrinsically Safe (IS), Explosion Proof (EX), FM, CSA, and ATEX certifications are available for
• hazardous area locations
Wilcoxon offers more than 600 LPSTM to ensure we have the sensor that is right for you.
Option 1
Loop powered sensors output

Process control system
4-20 mA data that can input directly
to your process control system
Option 2
Standard accelerometers yield raw The iT Transmitter conditions raw A BNC connector on the iT Transmitter’s front
dynamic data vibration data and sends 4-20 mA data panel gives you access to the raw vibration data
to your process control system for further analysis
Intelligent Transmitters
The Intelligent Transmitter – our iT Series – accepts input from a traditional IEPE dynamic vibration sensor and
converts the signal to 4-20 mA output.
All units are custom configured as ordered to provide the best fit for your specific application.
Adjustable filter settings can be modified in the field to address your changing needs.
Over 30,000 configurations are available! Custom order your iT Transmitter:

Acceleration or velocity input with acceleration, velocity or displacement output
Selectable full scale in English or metric units
Output of rms or peak, or Wilcoxon’s exclusive true peak or true peak-to-peak
10 mV, 100 mV or 500 mV sensor input
Choose high-pass and low-pass filters from over 20 possibilities
4
Intelligent alarming
iT Alarm module
Wilcoxon’s iT Alarm module is the most accurate and powerful relay alarm of its kind. You can use the iT Alarm
with the iT Transmitter or any 4-20 mA sensor (including level, flow, pressure, temperature, force and speed) to
provide local notification of potential problems. The alarm allows up to three set points for relay control with user
established delays for minimizing false alarms. A front-panel LED readout displays real time 4-20 mA data or the
percentage of full scale output. You can utilize the three alarm levels to achieve optimal notification, based upon
the manufacturer’s recommendations. The ISO 10816-3 standard sets forth guidelines for the monitoring of
machines at their bearing positions and have suggested alarm and trip levels for various classes of machines.
• Region “A” is considered good vibration for new

ISO 10816-3, Vibration Measurements on Rigid machines
Rotor Machines, in situ • Region “B” is considered acceptable for continuous
Machines Machines running
Velocity 20 HP to 400 HP over 400 HP • Region “C” vibration is considered unsatisfactory
in/sec equiv mm/sec Integrated drive Separate drive and maintenance should be planned
Peak RMS pumps over 40 HP pumps over 40 HP
• Region “D” vibration is unacceptable and machinery
D should be immediately taken out of service for
0.39 7.1 D maintenance
C
0.25 4.5
C The three iT Alarm relays (1, 2, and 3) should be set to
0.16 2.8 B the boundary level at the transition of (1) B to C, (2) C to
D, and (3) 25% above the C to D transition for a “TRIP”
0.13 2.3 B
function. Relay 1 is considered the “warning” level
0.08 1.4 where increased inspection or maintenance should be
A undertaken. Relay 2 is considered the “alarm” level
0.00 0.0
A
where plans should be made to take the machine out of
service for maintenance. Relay 3 is considered the
“shutdown” level when the machine should be
automatically removed from service for immediate
maintenance action.
Direct input from any 4-20mA sensor
Acceleration
Velocity
Displacement
Pressure
Temperature
Speed
Force
Flow
Etc.
5
iT Series Communication Module
PC-based online vibration monitoring
The iT Communication Module is the only stand-alone digital communication unit for vibration transmitters.
You can “daisy chain” link up to eight iT Communication Modules to one RS232 serial port on one computer,
allowing you to monitor machine health directly from your workstation without the investment of a costly
monitoring system.
The iT Communication Module works in conjunction with Wilcoxon’s free VibeLink® software to provide you
economical online monitoring with significant capabilities. You can trend machine health over time without
walk-around data collection or vibration analysis. Both graphing and data logging views display on your desktop
to easily record and recognize upward trends in vibration levels. The digital data stream can be imported to any
standard spreadsheet or data logging program.
6
Network accessories
iT installation
To operate the iT Series, standard or custom cables, enclosures, connectors, power and all necessary
accessories for online monitoring are available from Wilcoxon.
All units are DIN rail mounted. Attach the iT Alarm and iT Communication Module to a TBUS connector on the
DIN rail and the units will automatically engage with the iT Transmitter to obtain all data and power necessary
with no external wiring.
Power supplies
Modules operate from a nominal 24 VDC power supply. Supply power to the iT Transmitter and it provides power
to any module connected to it on the TBUS and the sensor. One power supply can power up to 30 modules.
Module enclosure
A system enclosure will house iT Transmitters, iT Alarms, iT Communication Modules and 24 VDC power supplies,
as well as AC power terminal blocks with fusing and disconnect. Large enclosures can house up to 25 units and
power for all.
The enclosure has two cable entry options. One option is a 6-position cable grip gland for sealing the sensor wir-
ing entry. The other option is a standard 1” conduit fitting for connection to plant AC power and PLC wiring.
Cable
The cables recommended for the iT Series network are Wilcoxon R6QI-0-J9T2A-32 cables. These utilize a
watertight IP68-rated connector at the sensor and have a durable, chemical resistant Teflon® cable jacket.
Custom length, options and environmental protections are available.
7
Installation guide for hazardous areas
This installation guide should not be used as the

controlling document for the installation of devices
in a hazardous area.
This guide is NOT A CONTROL DRAWING.
Any installation of devices within a hazardous area

as defined in the NEC® or ATEX Directive MUST
BE in accordance with that device's CONTROL
DRAWING and local ordinances.
a
Table of contents
Acronyms, terms and definitions ...................................................................... 3

1.0 Introduction................................................................................................... 4
1.1 The fire triangle......................................................................................... 4
1.2 Fire loss control ........................................................................................ 5
1.3 The National Electrical Code® ................................................................. 5
2.0 Hazardous areas and classifications .......................................................... 6
2.1 Class, Division and Zone .......................................................................... 6
2.2 Methods of protection ............................................................................... 8
2.2.1 Intrinsic safety.................................................................................... 8
2.2.1.1 Intrinsically safe apparatus entity parameters .............................. 9
2.2.2 Explosion proof ................................................................................ 11
2.2.3 Air purge .......................................................................................... 11
2.2.4 Other methods ................................................................................. 11
2.3 Class I, Division 2 locations .................................................................... 11
2.4 Wiring methods....................................................................................... 12
2.4.1 Intrinsically safe circuits ................................................................... 12
2.5 Marking examples .................................................................................. 13
3.0 Wiring Wilcoxon intrinsically safe sensors ............................................. 13
3.1 Dynamic vibration sensor wiring ............................................................. 13
3.1.1 Effects of barrier on bias output voltage (BOV)................................ 13
3.1.2 Troubleshooting ............................................................................... 14
3.2 LPS 4-20 mA sensor wiring .................................................................... 15
3.2.1 Troubleshooting the 4-20 mA LPS wiring......................................... 16
4.0 Technical assistance.................................................................................. 17
4.1 Technical and application assistance ..................................................... 17
4.2 Customer service.................................................................................... 17
Page 2 of 17
a
Acronyms
ATEX Appareils destinés à être utilisés en ATmosphères EXplosibles

CENELEC European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
NEC® National Electric Code® is a registered trademark of the National
Fire Protection Association
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
CSA Canadian Standards Association
IEPE Integrated Electronic PiezoElectric (transducer)
Terms and definitions
Sensor Accelerometer or PiezoVelocity transducer (PVT)

Power/signal The connection to an IEPE sensor carrying the power and also the
superimposed signal
Common The return side of the IEPE circuit
, M Ohm, Meg-Ohm (million Ohms)
Ignitable Any substance that can be burned
Flammable Capable of being easily ignited and of burning quickly
Combustion A usually rapid chemical process that produces heat and, often,
light
Combustible A mixture or substance that can be ignited to produce combustion
Dust Small particles of solid material that can be suspended in the air
easily
Fiber Thread-like material
Flyings Small metal particles produced during machining, turning or
grinding in metalworking
Page 3 of 17
a
1.0 Introduction
The concept of intrinsic safety in wiring recognizes that a sufficient concentration of
ignitable, flammable or combustible materials will be present, with air or another
oxidizer, to represent a fire or explosion hazard. These mixtures could easily be ignited
by a match or other open flame, or by a high-energy spark. The wiring used in areas
where these mixtures are present can be implemented in a manner which absolutely
precludes any possibility of igniting these mixtures. That is the essence of intrinsic
safety. Intrinsically safe wiring will never have enough energy available within the
defined hazardous area to ignite any explosive or combustible mixture of gasses, dusts,
or metals.
Where it is impossible to reduce the electrical circuit energy (as with electric motor
power) the circuits must be physically isolated from the hazardous atmosphere, dust or
metals. This is the principle behind explosion-proof wiring. Even if the circuit did ignite a
quantity of hazardous mixture, the wiring container, can “contain” the resulting explosion
and cool any escaping hot gasses so that they would be incapable of igniting the
hazardous mixture outside of the explosion-proof container.
1.1 The fire triangle
The fire triangle is a tool to illustrate the three elements which

must be present to have a fire or explosion: fuel, oxidizer, and
energy. Fuel and oxidizer must be present in a concentration
appropriate to form a combustible mixture. The ignition source
must supply enough energy to initiate combustion. If any one
of the elements of the triangle is not present in sufficient
amount, then combustion cannot occur.
The availability of energy, by either thermal or electrical means, can cause the ignition
of a combustible mixture. It need not be a spark or a flame; temperature alone can
supply the energy of initiation. The energy required to ignite various groups of
combustible substances have been proven by experimentation. Graphs of this data
have been produced, and can be used to indicate safe levels of energy. Only a very
small amount of energy may be required to cause ignition, such as the mixture of
hydrogen and air, which requires only 2O Joule of energy to ignite. In electrical circuits
the mechanism for the release of this ignition energy is often a spark from a circuit a
wiring fault that creates a gap in the wire allowing a spark to form. Electrical
components and equipment with hot surfaces also can cause ignition.
Fire is simply an oxidation process. Some oxidation processes proceed at a slow pace
while fire is a rapid oxidation process. While the oxidizer in most fires is oxygen, other
Page 4 of 17
a
chemicals may be oxidizers. For example, elemental magnesium will react violently with
water to release heat. The magnesium is the fuel and water provides the oxidizer.
The fuel component can be almost any substance. Most materials will burn under the
right temperature and pressure conditions. If steel is finely granulated, placed in a pure
oxygen environment, and then exposed to high temperatures, it will burn rapidly; almost
like it was coal. Flour in a bakery can do the same thing as can the dust produced from
grain stored in a grain elevator.
Certain fuels, when combined with air, can form an explosive mixture. The main
difference between a rapid fire and an explosion is that an explosion creates a pressure
wave due to the rapid production of hot gas volume. That pressure wave is what is
responsible for the "bang" associated with an explosion. The explosive pressure wave
can cause serious damage to facilities and humans.
1.2 Fire loss control
The concepts embodied in the fire triangle have been codified by various organizations.
In the United States, one of the earliest organizations established was the predecessor
of FM Global. In 1835 Zachariah Allen, a Rhode Island native and prominent textile mill
owner, set out to reduce the insurance premium on his Rhode Island mill by making
property improvements that would minimize the chance of fire loss.1 Although widely
accepted today, the concept of loss control was virtually unheard of at the time; but to
Allen, a proactive approach to preventing losses before they occurred made good
economic sense. As Allen predicted, proper fire prevention methods, monitored by
regular fire inspections for mill policyholders, resulted in fewer losses.
As time went on, more and more companies and businesses realized financial benefits
and insurance companies worked with their policyholders to help them reduce their fire
risks. Insurers, today, regularly require facilities to use equipment that has been certified
to comply with generally accepted standards for risk reduction. Carrying one or another
of many such marks identifies equipment meeting such standards. Examples are
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL), Factory Mutual (FM), and Canadian Standards
Organization (CSA).
1.3 The National Electrical Code®

a
By the end of 1895, there were five different recognized standards in the United States
that addressed the safe use of electrical equipment, as well as British and German
codes. Each different code meant a different set of standards for making an electrical
installation, resulting in confusion and controversy. On a quest for solidarity, several US
and international organizations held an 1896 meeting in New York and named itself the
"Joint Conference of Electrical and Allied Interests." The committee selected the most
Page 5 of 17
a
suitable criteria from all the various codes to establish the "National Code." Because it
was so fair and broad in its application, it was adopted without delay by the National
Board of Fire Underwriters and then issued by them as the "National Electrical Code of
1897." Thus, the "NEC®" was born.2
In the United States today, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) publishes
the NFPA 70 National Electrical Code®, also known as the NEC®. The NFPA does not
police or enforce compliance with the NEC®, and they do not certify, test or inspect
products, designs, or installations for compliance. However, most states and localities
within the U.S. cite the NEC® as the authority controlling electrical installations.
The European market is served by the ATEX directive and the IEC. The IEC also has
worldwide influence. The IEC publishes the IECEx scheme, a set of standards that
specifies requirements for both hazardous area electrical equipment and requirements
for the quality system of manufacturers of hazardous area electrical equipment.
Certification organizations perform the testing and qualifications required by the IECEx
scheme. Some Wilcoxon Research sensors were evaluated to the IEC requirements
and have been certified by KEMA to meet the requirements of the IECEx scheme.
2.0 Hazardous areas and classifications
2.1 Class, Division and Zone
NEC® Article 500 is entitled "Hazardous (Classified) Locations, Classes I, II, and III,
Divisions 1 and 2." Articles 500 through 516 enumerate the various classifications and
standards applicable to hazardous locations in the United States. Article 505 allows the
use of the "Zone" system for flammable gasses, vapors, or liquids. Consequently, the
Zone system does not apply to dust, fiber, or flyings.
Location Flammable or Flammables
combustible materials present: Continuously Intermittently Abnormally
Class I gases or vapors NEC® 505 Zone 0 Zone 1 Zone 2
Class II dust NEC® 500 Division 1 Division 1 Division 2
Class III fibers or flyings
Table 2.1.2 – Area location comparison, Class I NEC®
Table 2.1.1 - Class location definitions Zone versus Division locations
Hazardous area locations are classified by the type of combustible material present, the
extent of time it is present, and the physical construction of the area where such a
material is present.
The presence of flammable gasses or vapors in quantities sufficient to produce an

explosive or ignitable mixture constitutes a Class I location. A Class II location is
characterized by combustible dust. Class III locations have easily ignitable fibers or
Page 6 of 17
a
flyings, but not suspended in the air in quantities sufficient to produce an ignitable
airborne mixture.
Division 1 locations, in general, are those areas where ignitable or flammable

concentrations of combustible materials exist continuously or repeatedly during normal
operations. Division 2 locations, in general, are those areas where such materials exist
in ignitable or flammable concentrations only during periods of abnormal operating
conditions.
Zone 0 locations, in general, are those areas where ignitable or flammable

concentrations of combustible materials exist continuously or for long periods of time.
Zone 1 locations, in general, are those areas where ignitable or flammable
concentrations of combustible materials are likely to or frequently exist during normal
operations. Zone 2 locations, in general, are those areas where ignitable or flammable
concentrations of combustible materials are not likely to occur during normal operations
or will exist for only a brief period of time. Typical gas, NEC material
fiber, or dust category
For all of these locations there are also various Acetylene Class I, Group A
groups of gasses, vapors, dusts or fibers. The Hydrogen Class I, Group B
groups have been established based on the Ethylene Class I, Group C
ignition energy required for each of the Propane Class I, Group D
constituents within that group. Table 2.1.3 Methane not covered within NEC®
identifies typical materials within each group and Metallic dust Class II, Group E
the group identification. Coal dust Class II, Group F
Max surface Grain Dust Class II, Group G
temperature (°C) NEC® Fibers Class III
450 T1 Table 2.1.3 – Apparatus grouping
300 T2
280 T2A
260 T2B
All flammable materials have an ignition temperature. Even
230 T2C if the material is not exposed to an open flame or spark,
215 T2D they will ignite if they are exposed to an object whose
200 T3 temperature exceeds the ignition temperature for that
180 T3A material. All apparatus designed for installation in hazardous
165 T3B areas are rated for their maximum surface temperature.
160 T3C Consequently, all apparatus have a temperature code
135 T4 associated with their hazardous area classification. Table
120 T4A
2.1.4 show the temperature code/class for apparatus.
100 T5 a
85 -
Table 2.1.4 – Temperature code/class for apparatus .
Page 7 of 17
a
2.2 Methods of protection
There are four basic principles to provide protection for hazardous area electrical circuit
wiring: (1) prevent arcs, sparks and hot surfaces; (2) prevent the combustible material
from entering the space; (3) contain any explosion of combustible material within the
electric enclosure; or (4) limit the energy available for sparks and hot surfaces. Methods
of protection and their permitted use areas are summarized in table 2.2.1.
Protection method NEC® Class I NEC® Class I NEC® Class II NEC® Class III
(Aex identification) Zone Division Division Division
Intrinsic Safety (ia) 0, 1, or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2
Intrinsic Safety (ib) 1 or 2 2
Flameproof (d) 1 or 2 2
Explosion Proof 1 or 2
Pressurization (p) 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2
Increased Safety 1 or 2 2
Encapsulation (m) 1 or 2 2
Oil immersion (o) 1 or 2 2
Dust Ignitionproof 1 or 2
Hermetically 2 2 1 or 2
Dusttight 2 1 or 2
Powder Filled (q) 1 or 2 2
Non-Sparking (n) 2 2
Non-Incendive 2 2 2 1 or 2
®
Table 2.2.1 – Protection methods and permitted use for NEC
These protection methods are the methods permitted. NEC® Article 500.8 (A) (1) (1)
states that the suitability of identified equipment shall be determined from (1) the
equipment listing or labeling, (2) evidence of equipment evaluation from a qualified
testing laboratory or inspection agency concerned with product evaluation, or (3)
evidence acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction such as a manufacturer's self-
evaluation or an owner's engineering judgment. Subparagraph (2) states that equipment
that has been identified for a Division 1 location shall be permitted in a Division 2
location of the same class and group.
2.2.1 Intrinsic safety
The National Electric Code® defines an intrinsically safe circuit as a circuit in which any
spark or thermal effect is incapable of causing ignition of a mixture of flammable or a
combustible material in air under prescribed test conditions. It also defines an
intrinsically safe system as one that is an assembly of interconnected intrinsically safe
apparatus, associated apparatus, and interconnecting cables in that those parts of the
system that may be used in hazardous (classified) locations are intrinsically safe
circuits.3 Intrinsically safe apparatus have been tested to meet these requirements. The
testing of the apparatus is designed to verify the operating parameters of the device and
set the limits for its use in hazardous areas.
Page 8 of 17
a
In a typical intrinsically safe system for vibration transducers, the transducer is an

approved device with an intrinsically safe circuit and is wired through an approved zener
barrier device to the non-hazardous area. All wiring between the transducer and the
barrier must also meet the requirements for hazardous (classified) area installation.
Zener barrier devices limit the availability of energy to the

wiring in the hazardous area. Figure 2.2.1 illustrates the
internal schematic of a basic zener barrier. The zener diode
in the center of the circuit acts to clamp the voltage available
to the circuit in the hazardous area. Zener diodes are used
because they have a very high resistance until the voltage
rises to their conduction voltage. Once in conduction, the
Figure 2.2.1 - Basic zener
diode "clamps" the voltage to a maximum value. It is this barrier schematic
property of the zener diode that is exploited for use in
instrumentation circuits in hazardous areas. The resistor, R, limits the maximum current
available to the hazardous area circuit wiring. Since the voltage and the current are
limited, the power is also limited.
As an additional safety method, the barrier device also contains a fuse. The fuse will act
to limit the current through the barrier circuit in the event that either the resistor or the
zener should fault.
WARNING: Wilcoxon transducers that carry approvals for intrinsically safe circuits must
always be installed with safety barriers in the circuits for Class I Division 1, Zone 0 or
Zone 1 areas. Simply buying a transducer that carries an intrinsically safe rating is not
sufficient for permanently installed vibration transducers. Portable vibration analyzers or
data collectors used within hazardous (classified) areas must also be rated for use
within those areas.
2.2.1.1 Intrinsically safe apparatus entity parameters
An intrinsically safe system is an assembly of interconnected intrinsically safe

apparatus, associated apparatus, and interconnecting cables. In the case of vibration
sensors, the intrinsically safe apparatus is the sensor itself. The associated apparatus is
the safety barrier.
a
The sensor must be installed in a specific manner as outlined in an installation drawing
which is part of the certification. The certification process establishes the mechanical
mounting and electrical connection requirements. In many instances, the sensor must
be connected to an intermediate device, a safety barrier, which protects harmful
voltages and currents from reaching the sensor in the event of a failure either in the
Page 9 of 17
a
sensor or the associated readout equipment. Apparatus have four rating parameters:
voltage, current, capacitance, and inductance.
The open-circuit voltage available at the terminals of the barrier is Voc. The short-circuit
current available at the terminals of the barrier is Isc. The maximum capacitance that can
be connected to the barrier apparatus is Ca while the maximum inductance that can be
connected is La. The vibration sensor voltage rating, Vmax, is the maximum voltage that
can be applied to the terminals of the sensor. The current rating, Imax, is the maximum
current that can be applied through the terminals of the sensor. The maximum value of
acceptable internal capacitance, Ci, and inductance, Li, are also stated. When the
sensor and barrier are connected together in a system, the cable capacitance, Ccable,
and inductance, Lcable, must also be considered in the system.
By comparing the ratings of the vibration sensors with those of the barrier and taking the
cable values into account, an appropriate safety barrier can be selected. As long as the
ratings satisfy the following equations, the system will meet the requirement for an
intrinsically safe system.
Voc must be equal to or less than Vmax Voc  Vmax

Isc must be equal to or less than Imax Isc  Imax
Ca must be greater than or equal to Ci + Ccable Ca  Ci + Ccable
La must be greater than or equal to Li + Lcable La  Li + Lcable
Example
The ratings for the Wilcoxon Research 793E intrinsically safe rated accelerometer are: Vmax = 30 V dc ,
Imax = 180 mA , Ci = 0.03 F. There are no inductive elements in the sensor therefore Li = 0.00 mH.
A barrier such as Wilcoxon Research ISBS-STD-08 has the following parameters:

Voc = 28 V dc, Isc = 93 mA, plus the additional requirements Ca = 0.083 F, and La = 4.2 mH (higher
values of La are permissible because there are no inductive elements in the sensor).
In a typical application these devices are connected using 200 feet of the Wilcoxon J9T2A cable, which
has a capacitance of 30 pF per foot. The cable capacitance is then 200 times 30 pF, equaling 0.006F.
Now, let's put the numbers into the equations to see if these two devices are compatible for use as an
intrinsically safe system. The equations, again, are stated here and the numbers substituted into the
equation. If all the equations are satisfied as "True" the two devices can be used as an intrinsically safe a
system.
Voc  Vmax 28 V  30 V True

Isc  Imax 93 mA  180 mA True
Ca  Ci + Ccable 0.083 F  0.03 F + 0.006 F True
La  Li + Lcable 4.2 mH  0.00 mH + 0.00 mH True
Page 10 of 17
a
2.2.2 Explosion proof
The principle behind explosion-proof transducers and wiring is that if the ignition of
flammable material that occurs within the transducer or wiring it will be contained. The
hot gasses and flames will not be allowed to escape into the hazardous area and further
propagate the fire or explosion. All circuit wiring is run in conduit and junction boxes
approved for explosion-proof installation.
Explosion proof transducers and wiring must be installed according to ANSI/UL 1203-
1994, Explosion-Proof and Dust-Ignition-Proof Electrical Equipment for Use in
Hazardous (Classified) Locations.
2.2.3 Air purge
When installations are not explosion proof or intrinsically safe, pressurization is often
used to maintain the classified area safety. Wiring and enclosures are protected using a
positive air pressure maintained within the enclosure, junction boxes and conduit.
The concept of pressurization protection is covered under ANSI/NFPA 496-1998,

Purged and Pressurized Enclosures for Electrical Equipment.
2.2.4 Other methods
Flameproof (d), increased safety (e), encapsulation (m), oil immersion (o), dust ignition
proof, dust tight, powder filled (q), non-sparking (n), non-incendive, and hermetically
sealed are other levels of protection. Each is used where appropriate for electrical
circuit wiring. Many of them apply to AC powered circuits, but few are used for
instrumentation circuit wiring.
2.3 Class I, Division 2 locations
In the United States, section 500 of the NEC® specifically cites hermetic sealing as a
protective method allowed for Class I, Division 2 areas. Hermetically sealed
accelerometers can be installed in Class I, Division 2 locations.
Accelerometers do not have to be specifically marked as suitable for Division 2

locations. General purpose equipment that is operated in Class I areas must be marked a
with a temperature code if they have surfaces that rise above 100C when operating in
an ambient temperature of 40C. Since Wilcoxon accelerometers do not rise above
100C in an ambient temperature of 40C, they do not require marking.
The governing judgment as to the acceptability of accelerometers for installation is in

section 500.8. It cites the following as an item of guidance for determining the suitability
Page 11 of 17
a
of equipment for installation: "Evidence acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction

such as a manufacturer's self-evaluation or an owner's engineering judgment."
ANSI/ISA–12.12.01–2000, Nonincendive Electrical Equipment for Use in Class I and II,

Division 2 and Class III, Divisions 1 and 2 Hazardous (Classified) Locations states in the
Scope, paragraph 2.5, "This standard is not intended to cover equipment for use in
Class I and Class II, Division 1 locations, such as equipment constructed to be
intrinsically safe, dust ignition-proof, or explosion-proof. Such equipment is, however,
suitable for use in Class I and Class II, Division 2 locations in the same group for which
it is suitable in Division 1."
2.4 Wiring methods
2.4.1 Intrinsically safe circuits
The NEC® Article 504 controls the wiring of intrinsically safe circuits. It generally
requires that intrinsically safe circuits be physically separated from nonintrinsically safe
circuits. Conductors and cables of intrinsically safe circuits not in raceways or cable
trays shall be separated at least 50 mm (2 inches) and secured from conductors and
cables of any non-intrinsically safe circuits. Conductors of intrinsically safe circuits can
only be placed in the same raceway or cable tray with non-intrinsically safe circuits
when the intrinsically safe circuits are separated by a distance of 50 mm (2 inches) or
by a grounded metal partition or approved insulating partition. The 50 mm separation of
circuits also applies to the wiring within enclosures.
Intrinsic safety barriers have their input and output terminals separated by 50 mm
because of the spacing requirement. The input wiring of the enclosure where the
barriers are installed must maintain the required 50 mm physical separation between
the intrinsically safe circuits and the non-intrinsically safe circuits. Most barrier
manufacturers offer special mounting hardware to label the circuits and keep the
isolation required between the input and output wiring.
2.5 Marking examples
Intrinsically safe rated transducers will have the information

regarding the Class, Division or Zone, Group, and
Temperature ratings engraved directly on the sensor case. a
Illustrated here is the engraving from a Wilcoxon Research
793E accelerometer. The engraving also indicates the
installation control document number (WR 90546) shipped
with all intrinsically safe sensors.
Page 12 of 17
a
3.0 Wiring Wilcoxon Research intrinsically safe sensors
3.1 Dynamic vibration sensor wiring
More than twenty Wilcoxon Research accelerometers are certified to be Intrinsically

Safe. Acceleration output, velocity output, and low frequency capability Integrated
Electronic Piezoelectric (IEPE) sensors are available with
Intrinsically Safe certification. They are powered using a
constant-current diode or similar Field Effect Transistor (FET)
based powering system. In addition, there is a family of
Wilcoxon Research loop powered sensors for use in 4-20 mA
ISBS-STD-08
applications.
3.1.1 Effects of barrier on bias output voltage
IEPE sensors have an output that is a combination of the DC

bias output voltage (BOV) and the superimposed vibration
signal. The BOV is controlled by the sensor design and exists
as long as the current source provides adequate current. The Figure 3.1.1.1 - Barrier
sensor generally needs at least 1 mA of current. It is common to schematic ISBS-STD-08
use current values of 2 to 4 mA for the constant-current source.
When IEPE sensors are used in intrinsically safe circuits, the effects of the zener safety
barrier must be considered in the sensor operating circuit. It is possible to use a barrier
that provides a safe circuit, but precludes
the proper operation of the sensor. Max end-to-end resistance
333Ohms (1.332 Volts)
Illustrated in figures 3.1.1.1 the package 3

outline for the ISBS-STD-08 barrier. It has
four wiring connections. Terminals 1 and 13.5 Volts
(max) 14.83 Volts
2 are the safe area connections and
terminals 3 and 4 are the hazardous area
terminal connections. An intrinsically safe
rated accelerometer, such as the 4
Wilcoxon 793E, would be connected to
terminals 3 and 4. Figure 3.1.1.2 - Circuit voltages
As illustrated in figure 3.1.1.2, the 793E will be connected across terminals 3 and 4 in a
the circuit. The manufacturing specification of the 793E calls for its BOV not to exceed
13.5 volts. If the 793E is powered using a constant-current diode value of 4 mA, then
the resistance of the barrier will cause a voltage drop of 1.332 volts (333 x .004). The
total voltage drop across the barrier and the 793E could then be as high as 14.83 volts
(13.5+1.33) and will appear to be the BOV of the accelerometer as viewed across
Page 13 of 17
a
terminals 1 and 2 of the barrier. This is the effective maximum BOV that would be seen
by an analyzer connected to this circuit and using a powering current of 4 mA.
Since the accelerometer should allow for a maximum voltage to be 2 volts less than the
open-circuit supply voltage, a BOV of 14.83 volts means that the dynamic range of the
sensor will be limited. Assuming a typical supply voltage of 24 volts, the signal can only
go 7.17 volts from the zero reference before entering this "forbidden” 2 Volt zone of
operation. That means the effective dynamic signal is limited to 71.7 g's (7.17 Volts @
100 mV/g). If the 793E had its nominal BOV of 12 Volts across its terminals, then the
BOV seen at the output of the ISBS-STD-08 would be about 13.33 Volts and the entire
dynamic range would be available.
Figure 3.1.1.3 - 793E wiring example
Figure 3.1.1.3 shows the wiring for the 793E accelerometer. Shielded, twisted pair wire
is used throughout. The connector at the accelerometer must connect the shield of the
wire to the case of the 793E. However, the shield should not be connected to ground at
the barrier or an electrical ground loop will be created in the shield circuit. The shield on
the output of the barrier should also not be connected at the barrier for the same
reason. The barrier itself will be connected to an earth ground as required by the NEC®.
3.1.2 Troubleshooting
Improper wiring of Wilcoxon sensors will result in a loss of signal or excessive noise in
the signal. There are some simple steps that can verify proper installation. All
troubleshooting described here using an ohmmeter is conducted with the circuit "de- a
energized" so as not to confuse the readings. If the proper reading is not indicated, the
user must take action to determine why that connection is not correct.
The most common wiring faults are reversed wires and ground loops. Reversed wires
occur where the power/signal and the common wire get reversed. Ground loops are
Page 14 of 17
a
formed when there is more than one circuit path to ground. The shields should connect
to ground at only one point and that must be verified.
The Wilcoxon Research R6Q and the R6SL connectors will connect the shield to the
case of a 2-pin sensor. These connectors are designed with a conductive spring inside
the shell which makes contact with the neck of the connector to provide an electrical
connection between the shield and the case of the sensor. Some intrinsically safe
sensors require a third pin on their connector (pin "C") that internally connects to the
case of the sensor.
Wilcoxon uses several cables for its sensors. The black wire is the ‘common’ in the
circuit and connects to pin "B" of the connector of the sensor. The wire for the
"power/signal" connection will either be red or white and connects to pin "A" of the
sensor. Both the "A" and "B" pins of the sensor are isolated from ground. Ohmmeter
readings between either pin "A" and the case or pin "B" and the case should give a high
reading, over 10 M. With three-pin sensors, the reading between pin "C" and the case
should be less than 1.
With the sensor installed on the machine, the cable connected, and the output
terminated in the junction box or data acquisition system, the integrity of the
shield/ground connection can be tested. The safety barrier will be grounded to a good
earth ground (as required by the NEC®) and the shields can be tested separately to
verify they connect to ground.
The resistance between each wire's shield and the ground at the barrier should be less
than 10. Verify that the shields are not connected to any circuit or ground at the
barrier. Then, go to the sensor and remove the connector. The resistance between the
shield and the machine case should be over 10 M. Re-connect the cable to the
sensor.
At the junction box or data acquisition equipment, disconnect the wire (plug) from the
input panel. The resistance between the shield and the ground connection should be
over 10 M. Re-connect the cable to the input.
3.2 4-20 mA loop powered sensor wiring
Wire intrinsically safe loop powered sensors (LPS™), such as Wilcoxon Research a
models PC420-IS and PC421-IS, with an isolated type of connector on which the shield
does not connect to the case. Wilcoxon Research connectors R6W, R6QI, and R6SLI
all isolate the shield from the transducer case.
Where LPS™ intrinsically safe units are installed, it is important to avoid ground loops in
the shield circuit wiring. Figure 3.2 shows how the shields should be connected to avoid
Page 15 of 17
a
the possibility of ground loops. The shield at the LPS™ should be isolated from
connecting to the case. The shield of the cable from the sensor should connect to
ground at the barrier. The signal output cable from the barrier should not connect to
ground at the barrier, but must be connected to ground at the PLC or DCS.
Figure 3.2 – LPS Series wiring
Wilcoxon recommends safety barrier models ISBS-420-03 (panel mount) or ISBS-420-

06 (DIN rail mount), or equivalent. The ISBS-420-06 barrier has the following
parameters: Voc = 28 Volts, Isc = 93 mA. The LPS™ Series transducers have the
following parameters: Vmax = 30 Vdc, Imax = 106 mA; Ci = 0.03 F. The LPS™ Series
transducer and the associated safety barrier must satisfy the following equations to be
used together.
Example
Voc  Vmax 28 V  30 V True

Isc  Imax 93 mA  106 mA True
Ca  Ci + Ccable 0.083 F  0.03 F + 0.006 F True
(200 ft of cable @ 30 pF/ft)
Since the relationship between the parameters satisfy the equations, ISBS-420-06 can
be used with the LPS™ Series transducers in a Class 1, Division 1 (or Zone 0), Group A
gas hazardous area installation. However, the user must also follow the guidelines for
the ISBS-420-06 as to the maximum allowable capacitance in the cable. The ISBS-420-
06 lists the maximum capacitance as 0.083 F. The Wilcoxon J9T2A cable has 0.00003
F per foot of cable. Therefore it would take more than 4,000 feet of J9T2A cable to
exceed the capacitance limits imposed by the ISBS-420-06.
3.2.1 Troubleshooting the 4-20 mA LPS Wiring

a
An example of the loop wiring using an ISBS-STD-06 is
shown above in figure 3.2. The shield of the hazardous
area wiring connects to the ISBS-420-06 intrinsically safe
ground. Check the shielding in a manner similar to that in the Figure 3.2.1.1 – ISBS-STD-06
dynamic sensor section of this document. schematic
Page 16 of 17
a
Figure 3.2.1.1 illustrates a properly connected sensor. The +24 Volt DC power for the
LPS transducer connects to terminal "1" and the power connection to the transducer to
terminal "2". The return signal from the LPS transducer connects to terminal "4".
Between terminal "4" and "3" is a diode that restricts the signal to allow current flow only
from the hazardous area, but not to flow into the hazardous area.
If the power and return were accidentally switched at the input to the barrier (power to
"2" and return to "1", there would be no current flowing in the circuit. The loop current
would be zero. Likewise, if the wiring to the LPS is reversed (power to pin "B" and return
to pin "A") there will be no current allowed to flow in the circuit due to the protective
diodes installed in the LPS Series intrinsically safe transducers.
WARNING: All troubleshooting work performed on an intrinsically safe wiring installation

in a hazardous area should be conducted under a "Hot Work" permit under the
guidelines for permits in your plant. If diagnostics are performed using a "Cold Work"
permit, the multimeter used for circuit measurements MUST BE rated for use in a
hazardous area.
4.0 Technical assistance
4.1 Technical and application assistance
For technical or application assistance, please contact Wilcoxon’s Application

Engineering at 301-330-8811, FAX to 301-330-8873, or email to
Wilcoxon.techasst@meggitt.com.
4.2 Customer service
To obtain additional technical reports or sales support, please contact customer service
at 301-330-8811, or fax to 301-330-8873.
References:
1
Source: http://www.fmglobal.com/corporate_info/history.html, April 2003
2
http://www.nfpa.org/itemDetail.asp?categoryID=524&itemID=18295&URL=
Publications/necdigest/About%20the%20NEC®/History, April 2006
3
NEC® Article 504.2, NFPA, 2002 a
Page 17 of 17
Accelerometer Mounting
Hardware and Installation
Techniques
Precisely what you need

mount2.ppt Page 1
Mounting Considerations
➤ Is the location for monitoring in a safe,
accessible location?
➤ Can the accelerometer be permanently mounted?
➤ Can the machine be faced properly?
➤ Mounting location
➤ Where is the best location?
➤ Are there obstacles?
➤ What are the frequencies of interest?

mount2.ppt Page 2
Accelerometer Mounting
➤ Hardware Selection
➤ Mounting Location
➤ Surface Preparation
➤ Mounting Resonance's

mount2.ppt Page 3
Mounting Technique Determines
the Mounted Resonance

mount2.ppt Page 4
Probe Tips
➤ Use on difficult to reach areas

and aluminum motor frames
➤ Do not use for measurements

less than 10 Hz
➤ Mounted Resonance
800 - 1500 Hz

mount2.ppt Page 5
Magnets for Curved Surfaces
➤ Use on irregular and curved
surfaces
➤ Magnet made of Alnico 5
➤ Includes 1/4-28 Stud
3000 to 7000 Hz

mount2.ppt Page 6
Magnets for Flat Surfaces
➤ Use on flat surfaces or magnet
pads
➤ Magnet made of Rare Earth
Material
➤ Some have an integral 1/4-28
mounting stud while others
have a 1/4-28 Tapped Hole
➤ Other stud sizes are available
5000 to 10,000 Hz

mount2.ppt Page 7
QuickLINK® Mounting Pads
➤ Mounts quickly like a

magnet
➤ Uses dual lead threads
for less than 1 full turn
➤ High mounting
resonance like a stud
➤ Reduces cable and wrist
fatigue

mount2.ppt Page 8
Adhesive Mounting Pads
➤ Provides adequate
frequency response
➤ Pad available for most

common thread sizes
➤ Pad available for tapped

holes for use with
accelerometers that use
captive screws

mount2.ppt Page 9
Adhesive Mounting
➤ Spot Face Surface
Integral Stud
➤ Abrade Surface
Epoxy Filler
➤ Clean Surface
➤ Use Proper Adhesive
➤ VersiLock®
406 / Cat 19 Isolation Layer 608 R.1
➤ Loctite® Depend
➤ Loctite® Liquid Metal
➤ Use Proper Mix Ratios

mount2.ppt Page 10
Mounting Studs
➤ Provides highest frequency

response
➤ Various Stud sizes are
available
➤ Captive Screws with are
available with various
mounting threads

mount2.ppt Page 11
Stud Mounting
63 > 1.26"
S urfac e
➤ Tap Drill Hole to Fac ing
.004 C
Proper Depth .001
-C-
0.25"
0.735"
➤ Spot Face Surface
Perpendicular to Hole 607.cdr R.2
➤ Tap Proper Threads

➤ Ensure Flatness, Surface Texture, and
Perpendicularity

mount2.ppt Page 12
Advantages of Permanently
Mounted Sensors
➤ Safety
➤ Convenience
➤ Repeatability of Data
➤ Faster Data Collection
➤ Reduces Auto Collection Errors

mount2.ppt Page 13
Coupling Fluids
➤ Coupling fluids should Coupling fluids
be used between the include:
sensor and mounting " Silicone Grease
surface interfaces " Oil
" Petroleum Jelly
/ Beeswax

mount2.ppt Page 14
Mounting Responses
Probe Tip
Curved Surface Magnet

mount2.ppt Page 15
Mounting Responses
Flat Magnet
QuickLINK®
mount2.ppt Page 16
Mounting Resonance's
➤ Mounting Resonance's can amplify high
frequency signals and increase overload
➤ Mounting Resonance's can appear to be
severe rolling element and gear mesh faults
KNOW YOUR
MOUNTING
CONDITIONS!
mount2.ppt Page 17
Mounting Location
➤ Mount in the load zone
➤ Mount as close to the point
of interest
➤ Low profile, side exit
designs for confined areas
➤ Side exit allows for neat
cable routing

mount2.ppt Page 18
Switchable Junction Boxes
Junction Boxes:
Provide connection
centers for terminating
cables and connecting
to Portable Data
Collectors. They can
used in industrial
applications and can be
powered.

mount2.ppt Page 19
0
12
5
3425637859
85 55
5 5593
8559
94255938948546 865
5
7853252377854665295895995
365
35679$ )"+(+\$
]$bcde$#f$̀&g%(&"'$+'+"$
]$7&'"$+)P4M,4$.%&+$
]$Y.,%)#'($"!$Q"'$.%(*$$
$$$$+M)P$%+$%$g%&'L$
YM'$Z"$[%&,M$)"+(+\$
]$7%)P&'$.,%)#'($"$#%^"$$
$$$$.%&+$
]$5",,%(%,$4%#%L$
]$_"+($`'M$!"#$M'+)P4M,4$$
$$$$4"Q'(&#$
]$3)%..4$."4M)(+$&'$.")++$
]$Y4M'4%'($aM&.#'($%'4$+.%+$
!"#$#%&'('%')*$'"($)"+(,-$.%&+$ 5
5 /73359687593894854
84657808359 656 425965688665975

5
89
3658
85954996
234593
85
5 193894858

8757
3564287 8757385786558845
7 435
5 /7335968759389485
87 48652858875
5
87 79582 385
$
3&#.,&!&4$5"'4&(&"'$6%+4$7%&'('%')5835679:5
;3
9353
35495
037852853
659
35635295959423853657808359 65975
9593<55=635>?@A5503
935686
656333865/B1554843573
845325
5
9433C658D3635954
5668E56 42596595FG/E5H/IE5
5I/H5668<55B86559E5 5
7C5290855859503
9358D8
5585943985799J555
$
K.'4&'L$"'$-"M$35679$'4+*$N&,)"O"'$"!!+$(P$!",,"Q&'L$."4M)($".(&"'+55
RST5>?@A5503
935686
5U5
89599
$
R@T5>?@A5503
935686
5U5FG/VH/IVI/HW5
RXT54488
88
5U503
935
9638
5U5FG/VH/IVI/HW5
R>T54488
88
5U503
935
9638
5U5
89599
5U5FG/VH/IVI/HW5
W134D5
03786595528685
7 4658D485285FG/VH/IVI/H
0
0
123456789
5498948 7
854
!" "#$!"%"%%& %!'" "(
!$"(!"!'""'%(#")*#$&!""
(""!% !""!"()"%!& !##!""'%("
"'+!%),("( %!'" "#!%$!!"'%&
%"'" !!!"(!!! !' !" ), #!%"
%!&#!%"!" (!!""#!"'%
"%!)-"$"+("&"!( "!"'%#".!")"%!!!"(
%(! '!"(!!%#!!.."!( "!"'%"%(/!"
$"' !!%%!"!(%"(%!"'%)0!( "!"'%
!$"1 ""'&!#( #!%!&!'"&!"!(/"
%$(),&#(%!+!2345#!%#"62%& 78! "9
"1!+&%"'"%("!"$"%:9&888);
!&:7<&888#(%"(%%#"!"!%(!)
=
>?@AB4CD4E4F69554DG48D DH 4I4F69554DG4H597 H
:76883.28 ;$!"%"%%!"(!%
:2<8!%!'" "J"'3%!
KLMNOP4E42D7
4>?@AB4CD44
=
1234CD4E4F69554DG474G7
H5464QHDR7R
S4DG474G7
H54
:8!!( " &#(#!%""(%%!+(!%!(!
:2&888!"'%!"!! T(!!! !'U
:78&888%! %#!!"!'"! T(!!! !'U
:2<8!%!'" "#(%! ! !"'%#!
:7&8881"'%!"!% "'!( "!"'%"1!+
:7V2&888%$" 62%"%(("#"
:7<&888%(!(%"(%%
:226&2<8&WXYZ[=\X]Y=X^=^Z_[`ab
c8)2d&eaXfZf_[_Yg=X^=^Z_[`abT"($+3+!%U
KNNMOhP4E42D7
41234CD44

iDj48Ck4lD541234CD4SDm43
4D47
4k74799
S4
nWo=\X]Y]
:ppppppppp !("!( "
:ppppppppp(!!! !'
:ppppppppp !("!!
:ppppppppp!( "!%
:ppppppppp1"'%"!%$+%%$(%
:ppppppppp%$" ("#"
:ppppppppp%(!(%"(%%
:ppppppppp%!"!"q "
pppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp
:ppppppppp0,r%!
c pppppppp!+!T!" #"8!"7)8U
pppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp
:pppppppppWXYZ[=nWo=\X]Y

157lS4D4j Ck4 l5m4
s!7.<88.tusvcvw& !#(1"x '')( '###)#(1")(
" !")

CBM Manual

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

CBM Manual

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Thank You

• Oil & Gas

• Major Physical Measurement Devices

TALON Technical Sales

• Nanmac - Temperature Measurement & Instrumentation - has been a leader in temperature

You don’t have to know vibration to

Machinery health monitoring is critical to

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Machinery health monitoring is critical to

Pumps Cooling towers

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Machine monitoring is a vital part of maintenance

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Why choose vibration data?

Vibration monitoring has been one of the anchors of predictive technologies

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Benefits of vibration trending

Provides converted output of raw vibration data into 4-20 mA data

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

4-20 mA data addresses your needs

Budgets continue to be squeezed.

What is needed to start a new vibration

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Where do the sensors mount?

Horizontal mounting is preferred for pedestal

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

How do the sensors mount?

Cementing pad on machine

SF 8 cementing pad SF 6 stud

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Who analyzes the data?

Data “analysis” is not necessary.

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

When is maintenance required?

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Simplified Condition Monitoring

Trended data can be used for critical assets

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

What’s the cost impact ?

Depending on your needs and specific application, your cost per

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Can LPS® sensors withstand the harsh plant

Wilcoxon’s LPS® sensors are hermetically sealed and use cases

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

What about special applications?

FM, CSA, SIMTARS, and ATEX

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Control your process with simple vibration

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Wilcoxon Customer Sales & Service

301 330 8811

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

2/7/2006 © Wilcoxon Research. Confidential.

Failure to Justify the Program

Training and Partnering

Ongoing training is an important ingredient of a successful program. However, it needs to be the

Lack of Procedures / Methodology

Lack of Experience / Commitment

So far, we have touched on a number of different aspects of successful and unsuccessful

Data collector needs:

Does not need:

Data collector doesn't need:

• Increase operational efficiency