NASA

/ TM--2000-210371

A Comparison
Gear

Damage

Applied

Paula
Glenn

Detection

to Pitting

J. Dempsey
Research

Prepared

Center,

Cleveland,

and

Oil Debris

Methods

Damage

Ohio

for the

13th International
Engineering

Congress

on Condition

Monitoring

and

Diagnostic

Management

sponsored
Houston,

National

of Vibration

by the Society
Texas, December

Aeronautics

Space

Administration

Glenn

Research

September

Center

2000

and

for Machinery
3-8, 2000

Failure

Prevention

Technology

Available
NASA Center
7121 Standard

for Aerospace
Drive

from
National

Information

Technical

Information

Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield,
VA 22100
Price Code: A03

Hanover,
MD 21076
Price Code: A03
Available

electronically

at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/GLTRS

A COMPARISON

OF VIBRATION

DETECTION

METHODS

AND

Paula
National

Helicopter

real-time
flight

Health

performance

critical

helicopter

propose

fusion

intelligent

DAMAGE

DAMAGE

J. Dempsey

Monitoring

Systems

Some

diagnostics

provide

to prevent

reliable,
damage

are an important

of transmission

vibration

benefits

must

parameters

the reliability

two technologies,

systems.

(HUMS)

operating

transmission

to improve

combining

Ohio 44135

of helicopter

Helicopter

In order

researchers
and

Usage

monitoring

components.

HUMS.

GEAR

TO PITTING

Aeronautics
and Space Administration
Glenn Research Center
Cleveland,

Abstract:

OIL DEBRIS

APPLIED

part of a

diagnostics,

and oil monitoring,

of combining

multiple

many

using

sensors

of

data

to make

decisions
detected.

include
improved
detection
capabilities
and increased
probability
the event is
However,
if the sensors are inaccurate,
or the features extracted
from the sensors

are poor

predictors

of transmission

accuracy

of damage

prediction.

vibration

and oil analysis

focuses

on comparing

commercially

methods
on-line

to the vibration

Keywords:

Damage

oil debris

monitor

algorithms

detection;

Various

has

condition.
an early

occurred.

Oil debris

These
monitoring

stage. Oil debris

bridge
on-line

Health

monitoring;

monitors

And new

to identify

NAS A/TM--2000-

vibration

damage

the

integrity

of

This research
and NA4,

and a

on spur gears

in

algorithms

analysis,

component

Although

intelligent

major

210371

not commonly

that can count

wear

particles

oil monitors

abnormal

consists

when

for assessing

wear related

mainly

of off-line

are collected,
the debris

used for gearboxes,

and determine

are currently

fault types [1].

transmissions.

being

gearbox

conditions

at

oil analysis,

sent to labs and

A plug type chip detector

changes

Vibration

vibration.
Algorithms
have been
accelerometers
to detect when gear

oil samples

failure.

monitor;

in helicopter

are then used

for gearboxes

For off-line

damage.

Oil debris

damage

is also used to identify

The state of an indicator

the contacts.

oil debris

lated mass.
ability

debris.

between

FM4

pitting

gear pitting

exist for diagnosing

monitoring

for trends that indicate

that captures

will decrease

the individual

algorithms,

to detect

in detecting

Gears;

techniques

or plug type chip detectors.

analyzed

sensors

verify

the two technologies.

of two vibration

The method
most widely
used involves
monitoring
developed
using vibration
data collected
from gearbox
damage

of these

one must

Research
Center Spur Gear Fatigue Test Rig. Results from this research
rate of change
of debris mass measured
by the oil debris monitor
is

comparable

Introduction:

integration

prior to integrating

the capability

available

the NASA Glenn

indicate
that the

health,

For this reason,

uses a magnet

forms

an electrical

many

engines

have

the size and the accumudeveloped

that have

the

The goal of

future

HUMS

simple one parameter

rate

of commercially

warning

rates

extensive
limits

available

are average

interpretation

failures.

is to increase

available

oil debris

based

on the number

sensors

into one

the

and the probability

vibration

and oil based

methods

into a reliable

health

of the work

vibration

oil debris

the relative

performance

Apparatus

and

Test

to the other.

friction

losses
effective
stress.

Fatigue

The power

run in a manner
data. For these

71 ft-lbs.

Prior to collecting
were inspected

Vibration

loading
required

approximate
measured
pressure

by passage

was measured

NASA/TM--2000-210371

pitting

the

of

damage.

damage
was

1 shows

is only enough
spur gears

while

to be correlated
10,000

RPM

throughout

and through

flange

with

28 teeth,

to provide

to the vibration

the duration

accelerometer

and

torque

available

oil debris

mass.

The sensor

and calculates

that creates

using a capacitance

sensor

where

of 10 ft-lbs.

of the test. When

sensors installed

on the test rig.

lightweight,

that measures

transducer.

the change

of the sensor

the number

an accumulated

of particles,

in a

output
their

mass [7]. Shai_ speed was

a pulse signal for each revolution

pressure

were

for this test rig [6]. Oil debris data

the amplitude

measures

was

to the test data.

the shaft using miniature,

locations

an acceptable

and applied

and correlated

together

to overcome

having

maintaining

in

the test

are coupled

were run for 1 hour at a torque

of a metal particle

to the particle

from tests performed

[4]. Figure

of both sensors is shown in Figure 2. These locations

size (125 to 1000 microns)

sensor

stress

was documented

on the gear housing

a commercially

by an optical

of

the performance

The test gears are run offset

oil debris, speed and pressure

of optimum

signal is proportional

detection

prior to fusing

that twists one coupling

are standard

for damage

the damage

chosen based on an analysis

using

the

the performance

gear

the shafts

the system

gear contact

test data, the gears

using vibration,

field caused

mechanism

that allows

Location

magnetic

mass.

test rig are used to compare

Center

principle,

to drive

tests, run speed

accelerometers.

was collected

Research

on a four square

periodically

was found,

was measured

piezoelectric

in detecting

data was recorded

Glenn

face width to maximize

Data was collected

require
impeding

the data to set

to improving

and compare

techniques

[5]. The test gears

monitor

damage

is to evaluate

and .25 inch face width.

tests were

visual

key

is the first step required

Experimental

Operating

oil debris
Test gears

trending

[3]. Comparing

tests on a spur gear fatigue

Test Rig at NASA

in the system

bending

systems

that indicate

require

False

of these methods.

3.50 inch pitch diameter,

narrow

based

or the accumulated

critical

is detected

based

by a hydraulic

respect

is 60 percent.

algorithms

systems

by replacing
fault detection

system.

herein

controlled

in the facility.
applied

reported

analysis

of particles

techniques

The current

[2]. Vibration

to create

is the

monitoring

Procedure:

the Spur Gear Fatigue

with torque

system

monitoring

data from

hours

monitor

that damage

measurement

The objective

apparatus

flight

false alarms

system.

vibration

diagnosticians

damage

Integrating

and decrease

intelligent

through

1 per hundred

capabilities

Experimental

HUMS

by trained

Commercially
to predict

and

reliability

limits with an integrated

of the shaft. Load

Figure

2.--Accelerometer

Spur Gear Fatigue

Figure

1.--Spur

Oil debris

Gear Fatigue

monitor,

real-time

using

co-developed
minute.

recorded

Vibration

every

Vibration

Diagnostic
FM4

resulting

from damage

occurs,
time

Parameters:

parameters
average

is a technique

obtained

FM4

was

to react

Experimentation
and pressure

were

calculated

by taking

values

of the vibration

used to extract

the average

average
and

to detect
of teeth

in

in Real Time,
data was recorded

from

duration

this data

and

filtering

Several

statistical

meshing

components

are filtered

meshing

components

are the shaft and meshing

sidebands.

Two statistical

the filtered

signal.

Kurtosis

210371

relative

as a basis

operations

are used

standard

is the function

that quantifies

gear

damage

FM4 and NA4,

Signal

time

the

synchronous

noise by averaging

time synchronous
with each record
The desired

average

is

starting

at

signal,

which

signals.

This

and NA4 methods.

to calculate

FM4.

in a difference

frequencies
deviation

are

to the non-periodic

for FM4

from the signal resulting

operations,

[9]. FM4 and NA4

from additive

in the time domain

will intensify

the

3. When

is calculated.

waveforms

pattern

to detect

Prior to calculating

by the once per rev signal.

is used

were used in this

in the vibration

as it spreads

of the shaft. The signal

of the signal

signal

changes

of approximately

data

periodic

parameters

[8]. NA4 was developed

for both FM4 and NA4.

with the shaft speed,

time synchronous

diagnostic

to the damage

the same point in the cycle as determined

NASA/TM--2000-

and processed

at 200 KHz for one-second

NA4

developed

signal over one revolution

is synchronous

and

number

with nominal

increases

synchronous

the vibration

FM4

Two vibration

on a limited

and to continue

the value

averaging

Basic
Oil debris

and speed data was sampled

algorithms

and NA4.

of damage

dimensionless

Ames.

Test Rig (gearbox

removed).

data was collected

Ames-Lewis

and NASA

on

minute.

analysis,
onset

and raw vibration

ALBERT,

Glenn

Vibration

Test Rig.

pressure,

the program
by NASA

once per minute.

every

speed,

cover

locations

First
signal.

their harmonics

and kurtosis,

the

regular

The regular

and first order

are then performed

how "Gaussian"

a time history

on
is,

andis definedasthefourth momentof aprobabilitydensityfunction[ 10].FM4 is calculated

as follows:
K
FM4

( 1)

RMSDS

where
K = kurtosis
RMSDS

= standard

deviation

Kurtosis,

the fourth

moment

of the difference

signal

of a probability

density

function,

is calculated

by,

(2)
where
d = difference
,4 = mean

signal

value

of the difference

N = total number
RMSDS,

signal

of interpolated

the standard

data points

deviation

per reading

of the difference

signal

is calculated

by [11]

RMsvs-.

(3)
i=1

The NA4 parameter

change

involves

is calculated

retaining

components

of the difference

the kurtosis

of a data record

is divided

by the square

the variance

in a similar

the first order

signal.

The second

divided

change

variance.

data records

to FM4,
when

by the square

of the average

of all previous

manner

sidebands

with two alterations.

calculating
is that while

of the variance
The average

in the run ensemble

the regular
FM4

meshing

is calculated

of the same

variance

The first

record,

is the mean

by
NA4

value

of

[12].

NZ(,_
NA4(M)

-i:) 4

i=1

",

(4)

j=l

where
r = residual

signal

= shaft and meshing

of time synchronous
i: -- mean

value

of residual

N = total number
i = interpolated

averaged

data point
reading

j = reading

number

NAS AfI'M--2000-210371

and their harmonics

signal

signal

of interpolated

M = current

frequencies

number

data points

per reading

per reading

number

removed

from FFT

Discussion

of Results:

The analysis

discussed

two gear tests that ended when pitting

during

testing

measured

of Gear

damage

Set 1. Vibration

by the oil debris

in this section

monitor

occurred.

algorithms
are

on data collected

from

Figure 3 is a plot of the data measured

FM4,

plotted

is based

NA4,

versus

and the accumulated

reading

number.

mass

Readings

were

recorded once per minute. This test collected

13716 readings over 228 hours. FM4 and NA4
were calculated
for both the accelerometer
located on the shaft and the accelerometer
located
on the housing.
shutdown,
caused

During

the rig was brought

significant

at readings
to load

the 228 hours

spikes

of testing,

up to speed,

ten shutdowns

then the load was reapplied.

in the NA4 plot that can be observed

is due to the changes

this change

NA4 to even minor

of the running

average

was due to a load change,

changes

research

observation

to note on Fig. 3 is that after the shutdown

indicated

is needed

one 725 to 775 micron

in the accumulated

pitting

is defined

particle

for the

passed

load changes
shutdowns

in the denominator

of this algorithm.

not a damaged

The sensitivity

in several

sensitivity

through

gear.
research

of NA4

at reading

4681,

the sensor,

mass. This one large chip was apparently

rig was restarted

Initial

to correct

These

after

5309, and 5435. The sensitivity

in load has been documented

Additional

To restart

on Fig. 3 following

1455, 2576, 3663, 3736, 3982, 4128,4681,5035,

Unfortunately,

occurred.

flushed

papers

[ 13, 14].

to load.

Another

the oil debris

causing

of

monitor

a large increase

out of the line when

the

after the shutdown.

appeared

to occur

as pits less than

at reading

1/64 inches

11647.

Initial pitting

in diameter

with a depth

for the purpose

less than

of this paper

1/64 inches.

At the

completion
of the test, the gears were inspected
for damage. Initial pitting was observed
on
tooth 12 of both the driven and driver gears. By visual observation
of the overall plot on
Fig. 3, all parameters
Figure
damage

4 has an expanded
progressed.

accelerometers,
occurs.

showed

Figure

Y scale in order

Reviewing

and

the

5 shows

a significant

increase
to observe

accumulated

mass

increase

damage

FM4 and NA4

significantly

when

._J_[

housing

|n

Z<
"_

_
_

shaft "--_
housing

HI
I_

20_
"

_,
_"

_.

'

.....
2000

4000

6000

3.--Plot

of vibration

I ......
8000

Reading

10 000

I
12 000

"_

II,
14 000

number

and oil debris monitor

gear set 1.

71

__Oild- ,,r, i

10

Figure

pitting

i_4

FM4 shaft
.................FM4
NA4
NA4

to occur.

in NA4 and FM4 as pitting

algorithms

,-t

began

on the driver tooth at the completion

30

NASA/TM--2000-2103

pitting

the increase

Figs. 3 and 4, vibration

a photo of the damage

40

when

data for

for both
damage

of the test.

4O

i_

15

3O

4
FM4 shaft
..........

FM4 housing
NA4 shaft

<
Z

!_

NA4 housing
Oil debris

20-

31

m-

i!!
ii i:'

10

I
110O0

Figure

I 1 500

12 000

4.--Plot

12 500
Reading
number

of vibration

gear set 1 (expanded

Driver

Figure

13 000

13 500

and oil debris

monitor

14 000

data for

scale).

tooth

12

5.---Gear

Driven

damage

tooth 12

at completion

of gear set 1 test.

During

startup

mentioned
sensor
occurred

of the rig, chips

previously,

during

restarts.

Based

or did not occur,

mass is not the best method

the step change
An equation

generated

these chips

during

may become

on this data,

a simple

Instead,

this is shown

m = accumulated

> .005

mass

t = time in minutes
number

when

step change

gear

tests

of particles

And, as

through
where

the

pitting

or accumulated

from gear tests indicate

of the mass is a better

that
limit.

below:

where

NASA/TM--2000-21037

results

of the mass over the time from the last step change

that describes

mNmN-I
t N - tN_ 1

N -- reading

from

limit on number

damage.

the sensor.

in the line, then flushed

and experience

threshold

to indicate

test setup pass through

trapped

in mass

occurred

(5)

Based

on experimental

several

data collected

experiments

by the oil debris

when no damage

occurred,

the limit to indicate

pitting

damage

Defining

threshold

limits

for vibration

occurred

is a more challenging

indicate

pitting

initiation

of pitting

which

damage

generated

has occurred

for vibration

range

to indicate

research

papers

parameter

NA4.

from 3 to 5.4 [9, 15]. Three

no damage

occurred

on the test gears.

calculating
standard

the mean
deviation

varied,

and standard

was added

a weighted

average

defined

deviation

of FM4

pitting

ranged

each

the number

calculated

damage

7 as threshold
FM4,

has

value to
values

for

from 350 to 497 hours

for FM4 during

during

[ 16]. Since

of the limit was

as

tests were run on the test rig,

limit for this algorithm.

to the mean

and

was calculated

For parameter

The run hours

was used to set a threshold

this experiment

when

additional

for each test with a total of 1204 hours. The data recorded
damage

during

for this analysis.

algorithms

task. Several

monitor

a value of.005mg/minute

based

the tests when

no

This was done by first

test.

Next,

of readings

on the number

3 times

the

for each test

of readings

recorded
during each test. The weighted average was used as the threshold
limit for FM4.
From this exercise the limit for FM4 was set at 4.4503. Based on these threshold
limits, FM4
and the oil debris
false alarms
that

monitor

indicate

occurred

during

this test.

vibration
minimize

levels to increase,
false alarms.

Figures

6 and 7 are plots

algorithms
plotted
5314

FM4,

versus
readings

accelerometer
pitting

pitting

damage

for this test. This was mainly

appeared

NA4,

reading

Since

future

collected

located

research

is required

measured

Readings
over

on the shaft

to occur

91- I
/

factors

and the accumulated

number.

were

several

of the data

other

FM4

'

'

'

once

located

Oildebris

1
_

12_

0
1000

2000

3000
Reading

Figure

6.--Plot

of vibration

5000

6000

number

and oil debris

gear set 2.

NASA/TM--2000-210371

4000

monitor

the

Initial

5181 and initial

'!!If I

are

this test,

for both

on the housing.

monitor

During

calculated

at Reading

i iI_

limits to

Set 2. Vibration

per minute.
were

can cause

algorithm

by the oil debris

!Hll

NA4ho_sin_

damage

of Gear

were inspected

'

gear

vibration

testing

and NA4

and the accelerometer

Gears

than

measured

NA4 had the most

of NA4 to the load changes

to refine

were recorded

5020.

I-

than does NA4.

during

mass

88 hours.

at reading

--

sooner

due to the sensitivity

data for

12_

24

4500

4600

Figure

4200

7.--Plot

4800

4900
5000
5100
Reading
number

of vibration

gear set 2 (expanded

Driver

tooth

Driver

5200

and oil debris

I
5300

5400

monitor

5500

data for

scale).

teeth

15 and

16

Driver

teeth

17 and

18

Driven

tooth 9
Figure

NASA/TM--2000-

210371

Driven
8.--Gear

tooth

15

damage

Driven

teeth

at completion

16 and

17

Driven

of gear set 2 test.

tooth

18

pitting

was observed

on teeth 15 and 16 of the driver gear and teeth

gear. At the completion

of the test, destructive

of the teeth. Destructive

pitting

is more severe

the pitting

will get worse

If the test continues,

the purpose

of this paper,

1/64 inches

and the diameter

but the pits are larger

damage

in diameter

and cover

is defined

the diameter

is greater

1/16 inches.

From

than

the inspection,

tooth

driver

and driven

occur

on driver

initial

gears
teeth

teeth

was

numbers

17 and

Spalling

if the depth

is similar
is greater

were inspected

observed

in size.

teeth

pitting

photos

than
pitting

than 50 percent
than

1/64 inches

of
and

of the

19, 24, and 27, and

was observed

9, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 24. Spalling

8 shows

off. For

is greater

at the completion

on driver

and destructive

18. Figure

on several

to destructive

area (greater

if the depth

The gears

of initial

pitting

a considerable

as spalling

pitting

14. A combination

were observed

and the pits are larger

and the gear teeth may crack and break

as destructive

is less than 1/ 16 inches.

area). Damage

driven

and spalling

than initial pitting

is defined

tooth contact
test.

pitting

15, 16, and 17 of the driven

on both the

was beginning

of the

damaged

increase

when

teeth

to

at test

completion.
Referring
occurs.

to Figs. 6 and 7, all parameters

A shutdown

at readings

4903,

at reading

380 caused

due to the load change.

assessed
three

The goal of this research

the reliability

of this research

to increase
research

includes

performance
oil debris

Based

monitor

through

limits

the sensor

when

quantify

damage

performance

pitting

thresholds,

of each parameter

intelligent
system
make an accurate

NASA/TM--2000-210371

are made

to decrease

existing
restarts,

load

is improved,

trapped

effect

parameters,

load changes

NA4

is a method

pitting

line,

the

that are

a significant
be defined
Once

can be combined
data, interpret

to set

damage.

for the parameters.

parameters

and oil debris

must

the

requires

each showed

techniques

Future

to improve

in the lubrication

monitor

have

to load changes.

and

due to actual

Analytical

the three

to a

improvement

the false alarms

that can integrate

the vibration
decision based on the data.

that can be applied

The third improvement

and the oil debris

and to minimize

the

to the individual

its sensitivity

algorithms.

to occur.

Improving

to integrate

need to be made to the parameters

area that needs

from chips

research

of gear failure.

between

chips

algorithms

gear pitting.

attempting

The first is the significant

The second

began

of vibration

detecting
before

improvements

for vibration

FM4, NA4,

will improve

This preliminary

methodology

prediction

a relationship

during

damage

when

monitoring

that several

to differentiate

on the data collected,

increase

health

must be modified

of this algorithm.

alert and fault threshold

failure.

must be done

to improve

into

at Reading
is most likely

for load changes

the capability

gear pitting

parameters

performance.

looking

damage

also occurred

This increase/decrease

was to compare

Once improvements

indicate

their individual

on NA4. This algorithm

flushed

system.

Shutdowns

on Fig. 7, after the shutdown

slightly.

to detect

parameters

can be combined

pitting

algorithms.

of the individual

into an intelligent

transmission

the parameters
Results

monitor

of the individual

parameters

helicopter

spike of NA4.

system that compensates

of the vibration

FM4, NA4 and the oil debris

the reliability

the large

then decreased

An integrated

capability

Conclusions:

a significant

49 ! 9, 5128, and 518 i. As shown

4919, FM4 and NA4 increased

the prognostic

show

to
the

into an

the data, and

References:
l.

Howard,

P.L., and Reintjes,

Debris

Technologies.

Monitoring

2.

Presented

Systems,

GD-0197.
February

R.M.: Advanced

3.

Byington,

Oil Debris/Quality
Swansea
1999.

(Defense

HUM

in Gearbox

Failure

Condition

Lewicki, D.G. and Coy_ J.J.: Helicopter

Center. NASA Technical
Memorandum

5.

Lynwander,
Inc., 1983.

6.

Zakrajsek,

P.: Gear Drive

Systems

J.J., Townsend,
Memorandum

& Technology

Gear

Fatigue

105416,

May

Published

Use

Howe, B. and Muir, D.: In-Line Oil Debris

Condition
Assessment,
January
1, 1998.

8.

Stewart, R.M.: Some Useful Data Analysis Techniques

MHM/R/10/77,
Machine
Health Monitoring
Group,
Research,

University

Zakrajsek,

J.J., Townsend,

Methods
105950,

of Southhampton,

as Applied
April 1993.

10. Tustin Technical

Institute,
Course, April 1996.
1 I. Zakrajsek,
Technical

J.J., Decker,

Vibration

Diagnostic

13. Zakrajsek,

J.J.,

14. Zakrajsek,

J.J.,

H.J.,

Handschuh,
Bevel

Signal

Decker,

Detecting

Gear

Technical

Memorandum

Tooth

F.K., Huang,

H.J.,

S., Zakrajsek,

Technology,

Skeirik,
February

NASA/TM--2000-210371

R.:

Using

in Diagnostic

Dekker,

and Modifi-

Studies.

Decker,

April

For Helicopter

NASA
Gearbox

of Gear Fault Detection

and

Technical
Data

Prediction

H.J.:

R.F.,

Lewicki,

Contact

Ratio

NASA

June

of Fault

Face

and
Gear

1994.

Detection

Memorandum
D.G.,

Day

to the NA4 Gear

106553,

Application
Technical

Three

Techniques.

Memorandum

Data. NASA

Memorandum

Analysis

R.F.: An Enhancement

in a High

106822,

H.J.: Analysis

NASA

Processing

Handschuh,

Fracture

Research

for Gearbox Diagnostics.

Report
Institute of Sound and Vibration

Data.

Technical

Gear Fatigue

Signature Analysis of a Faulted

dum 106623, June 1994.
M.,

and

Lewis

12-16,

New York: Marcel

H.J.: An analysis

Failure

NASA

R.F.,

of Wales,
April

at NASA

and

1977.

and Handschuh,

Parameter.

Techniques
to Spiral
April 1994.

16. Slemp,

July

Fatigue

Digital

in University

(ODM)

J.J.: An Investigation
of Gear Mesh Failure
Memorandum
102340, November
1989.

12. Zakrajsek,

15. Choy,

Monitor

D.P., and Decker,

to Pitting

Forum,

1992.

7.

9.

through

for Vibration

Proceedings

F.B., and Decker,

Rig for

Australia,

Society

Techniques

Conference

Usage
DSTO-

Implemented

Helicopter

and Application.

and

Organization)

Transmission
Testing
89912, June 1987.

Design

Health

and Oil

G.F. Forsyth.

Systems

J.D.: Fusion

Testing.

D.P., Oswald,

of a Single-Mesh

Technical

Helicopter

Management

Monitoring

of Vibration

1999. Editor:

from the 53 rd American

4.

cation

Science

T.A., and Kozlowski,

International

on

February

and Vehicle

Proceedings

C.S., Merdes,

Workshop

Australia,

by DSTO

and IMA Architecture.

1997.

Man for the Integration

at the

Melbourne,

Published
1999.

Stewart,

J.: A Straw

106467,

Decker,
Mesh.

H.J.:
NASA

1995.

J.J., Handschuh,
Gear Transmission
Statistics

R.F, and Townsend,

System.

to Avoid

1999.

10

NASA

Vibration

D.P.:

Technical
False

Vibration
Memoran-

Alarms.

P/PM

REPORT

DOCUMENTATION

PAGE

FormApproved
OMB No. 0704-0188

Public
reporting
gathering
and
collection
Davis

of

burden
maintaining

for

information,

Highway,

this collection
of information
is
the data
needed,
and completing

including

Suite

1204,

suggestions

Arlington,

VA

for

estimated
to average
and
reviewing
the

reducing

22202-4302,

this

and

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)

burden,

to

the

to

Office

1 hour
collection

per
of

Washington
of

response,
+nformation.

including
Send

Headquarters

Management

and

the time
comments

Services,

BudgeL

2. REPORT DATE

for reviewing
instructions,
searching
regarding
this burden
estimate
or

Directorate

Paperwork

for

Reduction

information
Project

Technical

2000

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

A Comparison

(0704-0188),

5.

of Vibration

to Pitting

and Oil Debris

Gear

existing
any
other
Reports.

Washington,

data
sources,
aspect
of this
1215

DC

Jefferson

20503.

Damage

Detection

Memorandum

FUNDING

NUMBERS

Methods

Damage
WU-581-30-13-00

6. AUTHOR(S)
Paula

and

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

September

Applied

Operalions

J. Dempsey

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National
John

Aeronautics

H. Glenn

Cleveland,

and Space

Research

Ohio

National

Administration

Center

at Lewis

Field

E-12423

44135-3191

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING
Aeronautics

Washington,

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER

DC

AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

and Space

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING
AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

Administration

20546-0001

NASA

TM--2000-210371

+11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Prepared

for the

sponsored

13th International

by the Society

Responsible

person,

Paula

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY

on Condition

Failure

J. Dempsey,

Monitoring

Prevention

organization

and Diagnostic

Technology,

code

5950,

Houston,

(216)

Engineering

Texas,

Management

December

3-8,

2000.

433-3398.

STATEMENT

12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

- Unlimited

Unclassified
Subject

Congress

for Machinery,

Category:

This publication

01

Distribution:

is available

from the NASA Center for AeroSpace

Nonstandard

Information.

(301) 621-0390.

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

Helicopter

Health

helicopter

operating

an important

part

Usage

combining

benefits

of combining

predictors
reason,
gies.

This

available

multiple

is detected.

must

health,

focuses

Fatigue

Test

Rig.

Results

monitor

is comparable

from

decisions

this research

to the vibration

sensors

pitting
indicate

algorithms

data

improved

will

decrease

of two vibration

in detecting

and intelligent
capabilities

extracted

methods

algorithms,

of change

gear

fusion

pitting

Gears;

Damage

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF REPORT
Unclassified
NSN 7540-01-280-5500

of damage

and NA4,

mass

probabil-

are poor

prediction.

FM4

Glenn

Some

For

this

the two technolo-

and a commercially

Research

measured

Center

Spur

Gear

by the oil debris

damage.

15, NUMBER OF PAGES

detection;

Transmissions;

systems.

the sensors

are

researchers

and increased

to integrating

14. SUBJECT TERMS

Damage

from

of

diagnostics
many

prior

in the NASA
of debris

monitoring

transmission
diagnostics,

the accuracy

on spur gears

that the rate

performance

Helicopter

detection

or the features

and oil analysis

damage

real-time

of transmission

using

include

of vibration

the capability

to detect

the reliability

are inaccurate,

of these

reliable,
components.

and oil monitoring,

integrity

on comparing
monitor

provide
critical

to improve

if the sensors
integration

must

of flight

In order

to make

the individual

oil debris

(HUMS)

damage

vibration

sensors

However,

verify

research
on-line

HUMS.

two technologies,

of transmission
one

Systems

to prevent

of a helicopter

propose

ity the event

Monitoring

parameters

Health
assessment;

monitoring;
Pitting

Oil debris

monitor;

Vibration;

fatigue

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF THIS PAGE
Unclassified

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF ABSTRACT

16
16. PRICE CODE
20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

Unclassified
Standard

Form

Prescribed
298-102

by

298
ANSI

Std.

(Rev.
Z39-18

2-89)

ERRATA
NASA

Technical

A COMPARISON

Memorandum

OF VIBRATION

21037 l
AND

OIL DEBRIS

GEAR DAMAGE
DETECTION
METHODS
APPLIED
TO PITTING
DAMAGE
Paula

J. Dempsey

September

Page 4: Equation

FM4

(1) should

K
(RMSDS) 4

be

2000