One of the goals of Industry 4.0 is to minimize unplanned maintenance emergencies and to leverage the efficiency of condition-based, just-in-time labor and repairs. Achieving the benefits of predictive maintenance via an Industry 4.0-style plant requires not only a data capture ecosystem, but also reference values to inform the monitoring system. Effectively estimating the values of monitoring thresholds is not an easy task, especially in those cases where the manufacturer does not provide data, or the machine is not new but the monitoring system has just been installed, therefore a measurement history is not yet available. The purpose of the present work is assess, through the analysis of two separate test cases, whether the monitoring thresholds suggested by different internationally recognized standards may serve as effective starting values in a vibration-based condition monitoring system. While general agreement on the order of magnitude of the thresholds is present in all cases, the differences between the standards allow for conclusions to be drawn on the most convenient format and processing technique to handle the data and to assess the most/least conservative standards. This paper constitutes, to the authors knowledge, the only systematic study in which the recommendations of all available international standards for vibration monitoring of non-rotating parts are applied to the same test cases and compared.
European Commission. Directive 2008/122/ec of the European parliament and of the council on waste, 2008.
2.
JohanssonNRothEReimW. Smart and sustainable eMaintenance: capabilities for digitalization of maintenance. Sustainability2019; 11(13): 3553.
3.
PottingJHekkertMPWorrellE. Circular economy: Measuring innovation in the product chain -policy report. Technical report, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague, 2017.
4.
LaiCTAJiangWJacksonPR. Internet of things enabling condition-based maintenance in elevators service. J Qual Maint Eng2019; 25(4): 563–588.
5.
LiYPengSLiY, et al. A review of condition-based maintenance: its prognostic and operational aspects. Front Eng Manag2020; 7(3): 323–334.
6.
SathujodaPBatchuAObalareddyB. Fundamental frequency analysis of a thermally loaded corroded exponentially graded rotor bearing system. J Struct Integr Maint2021; 6(4): 257–269.
7.
LeeYJKwonHJSeokY, et al. IOT-based in situ condition monitoring of semiconductor fabrication equipment for e-maintenance. J Qual Maint Eng2021; 28(4): 736–747.
8.
AchouchMDimitrovaMZianeK, et al. On predictive maintenance in industry 4.0: overview, models, and challenges. Appl Sci2022; 12(16): 8081.
9.
BrusaEDelpreteCDi MaggioL. Eigen-spectrograms: an interpretable feature space for bearing fault diagnosis based on artificial intelligence and image processing. Mech Adv Mater Struct2023; 30(22): 4639–4651.
10.
ZijmHKlumppMClausenU, et al. (eds). Logistics and supply chain innovation. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing2016.
11.
ChineseDGhirardoG. Maintenance management in Italian manufacturing firms. J Qual Maint Eng2010; 16(2): 156–180.
12.
YlipääTSkooghABokrantzJ, et al. Identification of maintenance improvement potential using OEE assessment. Int J Product Perform Manag2017; 66(1): 126–143.
13.
JinXWeissBASiegelD, et al. Present status and future growth of advanced maintenance technology and strategy in us manufacturing. Int J Progn Health Manag2016; 7: 1–27.
FraserKHvolbyHHTsengTLB. Maintenance management models: a study of the published literature to identify empirical evidence. Int J Qual Reliab Manag2015; 32(6): 635–664.
16.
KothuruANookaSPLiuR. Audio-based tool condition monitoring in milling of the workpiece material with the hardness variation using support vector machines and convolutional neural networks. J Manuf Sci Eng2018; 140(11): 111006.
17.
BrusaEDalla VedovaMGiorioL, et al. Thermal condition monitoring of large smart bearing through fiber optic sensors. Mech Adv Mater Struct2019; 28(11): 1187–1193.
18.
TehraniGGGastaldiCBerrutiTM. Stability analysis of a parametrically excited ball bearing system. Int J Non Linear Mech2020; 120: 103350.
19.
BrusaEDelpreteCDi MaggioL. Deep transfer learning for machine diagnosis: From sound and music recognition to bearing fault detection. Appl Sci2021; 11(24): 11663.
20.
BrusaEDelpreteCGiorioL. Smart manufacturing in rolling process based on thermal safety monitoring by fiber optics sensors equipping mill bearings. Appl Sci2022; 12(9): 4186.
21.
StuhrBLiuR. A flexible similarity-based algorithm for tool condition monitoring. J Manuf Sci Eng2021; 144(3): 031010.
22.
SharpMDadfarniaMSprockT, et al. Procedural guide for system-level impact evaluation of industrial artificial intelligence-driven technologies: application to risk-based investment analysis for condition monitoring systems in manufacturing. J Manuf Sci Eng2021; 144(7): 071008.
23.
LeeJWuFZhaoW, et al. Prognostics and health management design for rotary machinery systems—reviews, methodology and applications. Mech Syst Signal Process2014; 42(1–2): 314–334.
24.
WangDTsuiKLMiaoQ. Prognostics and health management: a review of vibration based bearing and gear health indicators. IEEE Access2018; 6: 665–676.
25.
AlianHKonfortySBen-SimonU, et al. Bearing fault detection and fault size estimation using fiber-optic sensors. Mech Syst Signal Process2019; 120: 392–407.
26.
BrusaEBruzzoneFDelpreteC, et al. Health indicators construction for damage level assessment in bearing diagnostics: a proposal of an energetic approach based on envelope analysis. Appl Sci2020; 10(22): 8131.
27.
TehraniGGGastaldiCBerrutiTM. A forced response-based method to track instability of rotating systems. Euro J Mech2021; 90: 104319.
28.
RajapakshaNJayasingheSEnshaeiH, et al. Supervised machine learning algorithm selection for condition monitoring of induction motors. In: 2021 IEEE Southern power electronics conference (SPEC), Kigali, Rwanda, 6–9 December 2021, pp.1–10. New York: IEEE.
29.
SteckiJSRudov-ClarkSSteckiC. The rise and fall of CBM (condition based maintenance). Key Eng Mater2013; 588: 290–301.
30.
LeeJ. How to establish industrial AI technology and capability. In: Industrial AI. Singapore: Springer, 2020, pp.119–159, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press.
31.
NishchalKVermaAS. Intelligent condition based monitoring. Singapore: Springer, 2020.
32.
IngemarsdotterEKambanouMLJamsinE, et al. Challenges and solutions in condition-based maintenance implementation -a multiple case study. J Clean Product2021; 296: 126420.
33.
JardineAKLinDBanjevicD. A review on machinery diagnostics and prognostics implementing condition-based maintenance. Mech Syst Signal Process2006; 20(7): 1483–1510.
34.
JablonskiABarszczTBieleckaM, et al. Modeling of probability distribution functions for automatic threshold calculation in condition monitoring systems. Measurement2013; 46(1): 727–738.
35.
AshwearNErikssonA. Natural frequencies describe the pre-stress in tensegrity structures. Comput Struct2014; 138: 162–171.
36.
UmerMGastaldiCBottoD. Friction damping and forced-response of vibrating structures: An insight into model validation. Int J Solids Struct2020; 202: 521–531.
37.
RathboneT. Vibration tolerances. Power Plant Eng1939; 43: 721.
38.
YatesHG. Vibration diagnosis in marine geared turbines. Trans North East Coast Inst Eng Ship Builders1949; 65: 225.
39.
DownhamEWoodsR. The rationale of monitoring vibration on rotating machinery in continuously operating process plant. In: ASME vibration conference, Toronto, Canada, 71-Vibr-96, Naerum, Bruel and Kjaer.
40.
EshlemanR. Basic Machinery Vibrations, chapter Chapter 5 -Machine Condition Evaluation. Clarendon Hills, IL: VI Press, 1999.
41.
Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. Criterion for evaluation of mechanical vibration of machines -VDI 2056, VDI Verlag, Düsseldorf, 1964.
42.
MechanalysisI. Vibration technology manual, Chapter 2, basics of vibration, 1988.
43.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 20816-mechanical vibration—measurement and evaluation of machine vibration -part 1: General guidelines, 2016.
44.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 20816-mechanical vibration—measurement and evaluation of machine vibration— part 3: Industrial machinery with a power rating above 15 kw and operating speeds between 120 r/min and 30000 r/min, 2022.
45.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 20816 -mechanical vibration—measurement and evaluation of machine vibration-part 9: Gear units, 2020.
46.
American Petroleum Institute. API Std 677, 4th edition -general-purpose, extruder, and epicyclic gear units for petroleum, chemical, and gas industry services, 2021.
47.
American Petroleum Institute. API Std 613, 6th edition -special-purpose gears for petroleum, chemical, and gas industry services, 2021.
48.
General Motors Corporation. GM vibration standard for the purchase of new and rebuilt machinery and equipment, 1997Manufacturing Reliability & Maintenance Operations, Warren, Michigan.
49.
American Gear Manufacturers Association. ANSI/AGMA 6000-c20-specification for measurement of linear vibration on gear units, 2020.
