How to use the Compare Machines Tool
When valuable machine health data is being collected across a multitude of machines at a facility, a great deal of insight can be gained simply by seeing how these machines are behaving in relationship to each other, or when operating in similar scenarios. With the Compare Machines tool, you can gather and review all available machine health data across multiple machines quickly and easily.
How to find and set up the Compare Machines Tool
Before we examine some common scenarios where the Compare Machines tool may provide unique insights into machine and operational health, let's review how to access and set up the tool.
Launching the Compare Machines Tool
There are three ways to access the Compare Machines tool. The first is from the Machine Overview page.
Figure 1: Machine Overview Page for “Lego Motor 01” machine
Scroll to the bottom of the page and click Compare Data, as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: “Compare Data” button at the bottom of the Machine Overview page
The Compare Machines tool is displayed for the previously selected machine.
Another method is by clicking Compare on the left-hand platform menu.
Figure 3: The Compare Machines tool can be accessed from the left menu on the platform
The final method is by clicking Compare Machine below the EP axes selection area on the Analyst Page.
Figure 4: The Compare Machines tool can be accessed on the Analyst Page
Navigating and Basic Use of the Compare Machines Tool
Once the “Compare Machines” tool page has loaded, there are a few things to note in the default state. It is also worth noting that the following options can be changed at any time.
Trend axes selection - In Figure 5, above the visible trend data - “Motor 2H” is displayed. This is the default sensor axis selected for this machine (this will vary depending on your machine’s configuration).
The selected sensor and axis can be changed at any time by selecting Planes from the drop-down button above and to the left of the trend and selecting the relevant sensor axes you wish to view (see Figure 5).
Trend data selection - To the far right of the “Planes” drop-down menu, you’ll see a drop-down menu labeled “Overall Vibration - Velocity RMS”. This is the default trend selected for comparison. It can be changed at any time by clicking Overall Vibration and selecting the trend you wish to review (such as “Machine On”, “Surface Temperature”, etc.). Each tri-axial (three axes) vibration sensor’s data can be reviewed at each sensor either individually or simultaneously.
Trend time duration - Just above the “Overall Vibration - Velocity RMS” drop-down menu is linked text “Last 3 Months”. This is the default time length of the trend you will view. This can be adjusted from 1 month to 1 year at any time by simply clicking on the “Last 3 Months” text and choosing the preferred time length from the drop-down options.
Figure 5: Default View of the Compare Machines tool
Selecting Machines for Comparison
Once you’ve selected your initial desired sensor axes and trend data option for comparison, you can begin searching for comparable machines on the platform. To begin your search, click in the Search field just under the “Compare Machines” header at the top left of the page (see Figure 6).
Figure 6: Click in the “Search” field, to display the Refine search tab
This will open the ‘Refine search’ tab on the right, which allows you to filter your search by either Metadata (Motor HP, turning speed, drive configuration, etc.), Hierarchy (what facility the machine is located at), or MHI (machine health status of Acceptable, Monitor, Alarm, or Danger).
After selecting the desired criteria, the relevant machines are displayed. Select one or more machines to display their data below the currently displayed machine. Unselecting the checkbox removes the machine from the page.
Figure 7: Results of search
Machine trend data is now easily comparable between the selected machines.
Figure 8: Machine trend data for the selected machines
Practical Scenarios for the Compare Machines Tool
The Compare Machines tool can be used in many situations to gain a better perspective of machine and operational health:
Comparing the behavior of machines with identified faults for prioritization of planned repairs
Evaluating repair success
Comparison of maintenance practices for a specific machinery type, and more.
The following are two common scenarios using the tool. The approach used here can be applied to any other scenario that has available data on the machines you’re interested in.
Scenario 1 - Comparing operational data
The first scenario is common for the user who is not knowledgeable about vibration data but is hoping to gain some basic operational insights between machines at their facility. Our sensors collect vibration data, as well as magnetic and temperature data.
For this simple example, we’ve selected two similar machines at a facility and we want to know when these machines are running simultaneously or independently. In Figure 9, when just viewing the ‘Overall Vibration - Velocity RMS” across all available data points for trending, it appears that both machines have been operating nearly identically for the past three months.
Figure 9: ‘Overall Vibration - Velocity RMS’ trend data for Clean Water Pump 1 & 2
When the Trend Data selection is changed from “Overall Vibration - Velocity RMS” to “Machine On”, as shown in Figure 10, it is easy to see that the first machine (“Clean Water Pump 2”) did not run from September 17th to October 17th, when the machine was turned back on. Similar operational data comparisons, requiring no vibration knowledge can be done between multiple machines for run cycles, bearing temperatures, speed changes, etc.
Figure 10: ‘Machine On’ trend data for Clean Water Pump 1 & 2
Scenario 2 - Comparing vibration data
The second scenario is valuable to the end user with a basic understanding of vibration data who wants to compare vibration data across two similar machines.
For this second example, we have identified three machines that are in either a Monitor (Process Pump 404) or Alarm (Process Pump 402 and 408) health status for similar fault conditions - bearing wear and impacting (significant detrimental impacts at the bearing that do not show clear bearing fault frequencies) at the motor drive end bearing.
These three pumps are nearly identical and serve a very similar purpose in this facility, making these ideal candidates for using the Compare Machines tool. See Figure 11.
Two additional things to note here:
The relevant fault condition for each machine is listed directly below each machine’s name.
Each machine’s name is a hyperlink to that machine’s Machine Overview page.
Figure 11: Acceleration P2P data compared between three machines with similar fault conditions
We selected to compare the “Acceleration P2P” trends as we know that for advancing bearing wear or impacting, acceleration or envelope-related trends are usually reliable sources for assessing the severity of bearing-related faults.
In Figure 11, it can be seen that there is a clear magnitude of difference between Process Pump 404’s motor drive end bearing levels and Process Pump 402 and 408, which show acceleration levels 3-4 times higher in magnitude. Similar vibration data comparisons can be done for common vibration data such as velocity, envelope, and various run speed harmonic options for the vibration-knowledgeable end user. This makes it easier to assess the severity of the conditions seen at each respective bearing.
Maximizing the value of the Compare Machines Tool and your Augury Reliability Team
A great deal of machine and operational health insights can be gathered by having the ability to quickly and easily compile and compare various datasets across machines at a facility using the Compare Machines tool.
Note that all of the above examples relied on having some level of understanding of the relationship between the compared machines. In our three examples, the machines shown were redundant machines at a given facility, that provide the same service at the facility, have similar machine characteristics (Metadata), and have the same naming convention (“Process Pump 402, 404, and 408” for example).
To review data across machines that are related to each other in less obvious ways requires knowledge of the given facility that may not be clear to your Augury Reliability Success Manager or your Augury Vibration Analyst from the basic metadata provided in the platform for each machine (motor HP, rated speed, etc.).
If there is a machine showing signs of a health concern, and there is a known relationship to other machines that you think worth investigating, we strongly encourage leveraging the Compare Machines tool. Additionally, we encourage you to inform your Augury Reliability Success Manager or Vibration Analyst team of which additional machine(s) it would be valuable to simultaneously review, ensuring that the identified health concern is reviewed in the most holistic context possible.
It is our goal to provide the most accurate and practical machine health diagnostics and corrective actions possible. Leveraging the Compare Machines tool for broader machine and operational health context is one of the ways we can do this.