Synchronous, Non-Synchronous,

Sub-Synchronous
As we look at these terms in the vibration world and more folks moving to AI platforms I am wondering
if it may be time to rethink the broad definition of these terms as we apply them in the analysis work,
maybe its time we drop them all together and call them what they actually are.

I recently read a couple of posts that talked about these 3 terms and how they define the basis of our
vibration world. I had a manager awhile back that had gone to training and got his level 1 Vibration
Certification and in my eyes was struggling with these terms and the definitions of them. He had never
actually collected or analyzed any data so applying these terms to real world data was a struggle for him
at that time. We were discussing the wireless sensor he had decided we should use in our vibration
program and the frequency range of it. The low end cut off was 5Hz or 300 cpm and at least 25% or
more of the assets in our program have speeds that are well below this frequency. As I was explaining
the issue, I thought we were going to see he was not grasping the severity of the hole he was putting
our programs data analysis procedures.

I told him as an example since our cooling tower fans had an output speed of 150 cpm when it was
running on high, about half the time these fans are running at less than full speed we could lose a blade
off of one fans and the sensor and the alarms would never flag the failure mode. The imbalanced
condition it would start creating as the blade moved from the cracked condition to the complete failure
would not be picked up no matter how good our alarms were. We eventually lost a blade off one, but
the site had not bought and installed these sensors so I do not have the data to say it would have missed
the failure mode or not. As I was explaining this he kept says “You are telling me that these sensors will
not pick up Sub-Synchronous vibration”. Imbalance is defined first as high running speed 1X and second
as Synchronous Vibration. I was explained that losing the blade would not cause Sub-Synchronous
vibration in this case it would be Synchronous Vibration as it related to the Output speed of the gearbox.
He kept saying no its Sub-Synchronous Vibration because its below the 1800 rpm running speed of the
unit. This brought up a whole new conversation about these terms and how they are applied. Once he
understood that part, we were able to move on to the original conversation. I added this conversation
to help make the point of my original thought.

For over 15 years now I have only collected vibration data on my smaller gearboxes on conveyors and
drags on the input shaft and the output shaft. I use these 2 reading to do all the analysis work on the
gearboxes and conveyors they are linked to, this saves time in the field in the data collection process.
Many of the gearboxes I collect data on have at least 3 shafts with many have 4 shafts but the space
between all 3 shafts is typically less than 3 feet. When I started doing vibration in 1995, I was collecting
data on every shaft no matter what the size and configuration of the gearbox was mainly because of the
way I was taught and the equipment / platforms that we used. Back then I was working in a tire plant so
to be honest we were only looking at a few extremely critical smaller gearboxes, with most of the
gearboxes in the program being much larger with several feet of distance between the input and output
and the ends of the same gear shaft. Around 2000 after I left the tire plant I started to monitor what I
considered smaller gearboxes on conveyors so in order to same time in the field I quit collecting data
with an intermediate shaft speed set up.
By collecting just these 2 readings the terms Synchronous, Non-Synchronous and Sub-Synchronous
energy no longer applied to the reports I used to run because what is Non-Synchronous and Sub-
Synchronous to the report for the Input data can actually be Synchronous energy as it relates to the
intermediate shaft. As we move into what some consider the new world of AI analytics I am wondering if
maybe these terms need to be taught differently or maybe replaced all together with the actual terms of
the frequencies they represent? In the screen shot below of my machine data sheets I have circled 3
things that represent Synchronous vibration frequencies. But if you are only collecting vibration on the
input shaft at 784 cpm then they will all show up as something different in your reports and calculations.
Speed of the 2nd shaft 301.5 cpm, now becomes Sub-Synchronous instead of Synchronous. The number
of pinion teeth on the 2nd shaft 16 which creates the GMF of 4825 cpm becomes 6.154 orders of the 1st
shaft could be considered Non-Synchronous and 6.154 may actually line up close to a BPIO with a
bearing that has 16 rollers, even though this frequency is actually Synchronous energy.

Below is another screen shot of a failure that was found on the intermediate shaft of a gearbox using
the data collected on the output shaft. Another example how these terms and in this case Orders no
longer actually represents what the software calculates because it was based the speed of the output
shaft, however the CPM is correct.
I have not had any formal vibration training since 2008 so how things are being taught may have
changed a lot since then. What I do see is that there is more and more data being collected with online
systems using fewer data collection points and depending on more on Algorithms alone to identify
potential failure modes. I am not lucky enough to be in the AI world right now but this question and
many more are popping into my mind all the time. I have an idea of what a good AI platform will tell me
as an end user. As a person that is a firm believer in the use of AI to replace my Statistical Alarms and
screen at least 80% of my machines quickly and then screen the 20% that’s left over again and in the end
show me the 2% to 5% of the machines that I should really be concentrating my time on.