John Trulli is mechanical subject matter expert, CBM Services, at Allied Reliability Group. Email him at
[email protected].
While those of us who specialize in the various disciplines of condition monitoring — vibration analysis, airborne ultrasound, lubrication analysis, and thermographic imaging, to name a few — have had tremendous success with detecting potential failures for rotating equipment, the robot has always created some unique challenges for the analyst.
Robot joints move slowly and rarely rotate a full 360°, making it impossible to assign discrete fault frequency content. Combine that with the safety issues of being anywhere near one as it operates, and it makes it difficult, if not impossible, to apply traditional vibration analysis techniques. The robot’s bearings and gears are encased in housings that sink heat away; combine that again with the fact that most robotic joints rotate slowly, and thermographic imaging is no longer a viable option. While contact ultrasound could be an option, the twisting and turning of the robot’s joints makes it difficult to apply long enough to get a useful sound signature that would indicate potential failures. Considering all of these issues, one might attempt to install a condition-monitoring technology permanently with the hope that a continuous signal might detect enough vibration, noise, or heat to indicate potential failures, but the twisting and turning of the robot’s various axes create a whole new set of challenges (Figure 3).