state of the industry: predictive maintenance€¦ · state of the industry: predictive maintenance...
TRANSCRIPT
www.PlantServices.com-1-
State of the Industry:PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE
MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-2-
CONTENTS
PdM Balance 3
Asset monitoring on the go, Part 1 9
Asset monitoring on the go, Part 2 11
MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
By Thomas Wilk, Editor-in-Chief
Our 2017 predictive maintenance survey reveals
how plant teams are tying fresh approaches into their PdM programs.
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-4-
Read on for the survey highlights,
and then download the full set of 2017
PdM survey data at plnt.sv/1704-PDM.
DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY AND
PRESCRIPTIVE ANALYTICS
Data from the first two questions
of the survey – what is your job
function (see Figure 1) and how
many plants does your organization
manage (see Figure 2) – demonstrate
further progression of the trends
identified last year.
A plurality of 2017 respondents
(22.5%) still identify as maintenance
managers, with reliability engineers
as the next largest category (15.7%).
Technicians were more strongly repre-
sented this year in both maintenance
and reliability, and several non-MRO
job categories continue to hold steady
over time (controls and applications
engineers, sales and marketing, and
executive-level).
The decline of traditional “plant”
job titles continues, as these posi-
tions seem to be evolving into one of
the more-specialist categories listed
under both maintenance and reliabil-
ity. However, it is worth noting that
you also told us that decision-making
power over monitoring tools and con-
figurations still resides primarily in
the hands of the plant manager (37.5%)
Last year you told us that, despite planned and actual
investments in predictive maintenance, you were not all that
happy with the results of these.
What a difference a year can make – more PdM technolo-
gies than ever are being deployed, often in targeted and
complementary fashion, and your levels of satisfaction are
on the way up. Even the challenges to success have shifted
away from how to define expected benefits and more to
whether you have enough people (and the right people) to
execute effectively.
WHAT IS YOUR PRIMARY JOB FUNCTION? 2014 2017
Plant manager
Plant engineer
Maintenance manager
Maintenance engineer
Maintenance technician
Reliability engineer
Reliability technician
Controls engineer
Sales/marketing
Applications engineer
Corporate executive
figure 1
WHICH TYPES OF MAINTENANCE APPROACHES ARE CURRENTLY EMPLOYED BY YOUR PLANT?
Reactive (run-to-fail)
Preventive (periodic and/or route-based)
Predictive (diagnostics ahead of failure)
Prescriptive (diagnostics and guidance for repair) figure 3
12.8%6.7%
15.2%4.5%
24.2%22.5%
7.1%12.4%
7.1%7.9%
9.0%15.7%
7.1%12.4%
5.2%5.6%
1.4%1.7%
3.8%3.9%
6.6%6.7%
HOW MANY TOTAL PLANTS DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION MANAGE? 2014 2017
figure 2
1 plant
2-5 plants
6-15 plants
More than 15
35.9%
21.9%
29.3%
31.5%
13.7
16.3%
21.2%
30.3%
40.5%29.8%
15.3% 14.5%
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-5-
and the maintenance manager (57.9%),
despite the fact that significantly fewer
of these job roles seem to exist now
than in 2014. Some decision-making
authority does rest with the reliability
engineer (25.0%) and maintenance
engineer (23.0%), perhaps reflecting
that those job titles are on the rise.
It’s useful to consider these data in
the context of the trend in total num-
ber of plants organizations are manag-
ing. Figure 2 spotlights the continuing
trend toward plant consolidation, with
the number of single-plant operations
having dropped by almost 40% since
late 2014, and the number of opera-
tions with 15 or more plants having
increased by 43%. When contrasted
with job title data, it suggests that
plant managers are often being asked
to take responsibility for more than
one plant at a time – a finding that was
reinforced by our 2017 Workforce sur-
vey, in which 47% of respondents told
us that their current responsibilities
include additional plants beyond their
primary location (see our February
2017 cover story).
For this year’s survey, we also want-
ed to ask about how and your teams
are approaching the Next Big Thing:
prescriptive analytics. If predictive
maintenance is concerned with what
is likely to happen to an asset based
on a given set of condition monitor-
ing data, prescriptive analytics is the
logical next step, using those data sets
as well as other less-traditional data
sets (such as MES, ERP, and/or GIS
data) to identify a set of actions or
decision options that will address the
earlier prediction.
In essence, prescriptive analyt-
ics extracts actionable insight from
piles of data, answering the question,
“What is the best course of action for
a given situation?” Also, as machine
learning and predictive modeling
offerings get more sophisticated (and
affordable), prescriptive analytics can
continually take in new data to re-
predict and re-prescribe, thus learn-
ing with plant teams by improving
prediction accuracy and prescribing
better options over time.
This year’s PdM asked two brief
questions to identify where on the
prescriptive maintenance spectrum
you and your industry peers would
place yourselves (see Figures 3 and 4).
The good news is that almost half of
respondents (45.1%) indicated they
were engaging in some form of proac-
tive maintenance approach, whether
predictive or prescriptive. Of those
who indicated they were exploring
prescriptive options, 37.4% said they
were engaged now with prescriptive
maintenance, and an additional 10.7%
said there was money in this year’s
budget for prescriptive. (Just under
30% of respondents indicated that they
have no plans in this direction.)
TYING PdM PROGRAMS TOGETHER
In one of the more discouraging find-
ings from last year’s survey, readers
indicated that their overall levels of
dissatisfaction with their PdM pro-
grams had increased, despite planned
modest growth in levels of PdM in-
vestment. (Three areas of investment
in particular stood out as gaining
since 2014: control systems, EAM/
PdM PROGRAM: PERFORMANCE COMPARISON, 2014-2017
2014 2016 2017
Not effective 15.5% 15.6% 8.4%
Needs some improvement 40.3% 49.4% 45.8%
Satisfactory 24.8% 18.2% 21.4%
Effective 15.5% 14.3% 17.6%
Very effective 3.9% 2.6% 6.9%
figure 5
figure 4
10.7%23.7%
29.8% 37.4%Using now
In 2017 plans/budget
Within 3 years
No plans
TO WHAT DEGREE DOES YOUR TEAM OR ORGANIZATION CURRENTLY ENGAGE IN PRESCRIPTIVE MAINTENANCE?
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-6-
CMMS systems, and predictive analytics software.)
We are happy to report that things have changed: The overall
level of satisfaction with your PdM programs has gone up by
34% since our last survey, and the share of respondents who
thought that their PdM programs were “very effective” nearly
tripled. Figures 5, 6, and 7 include trending data from our past
three surveys, from 2014-2017, to better illustrate this rise in
satisfaction and showcase the organic growth in application of
PdM tools and technologies among survey respondents.
When asked which PdM technologies are being deployed,
respondents indicated that the same three options that led the
2016 survey (infrared, oil analysis, and vibration) also lead
this year’s survey, with each being selected by more than 70%
of respondents and with infrared again the most-deployed
PdM technology (at 74.8%). Two other data trends stand out:
(1) the general increase in PdM technology use, and (2) the
decline in reported use of predictive modeling software.
Ultrasound, electric motor testing, acoustic, and corro-
sion technologies registered increases in use, suggesting that
plant teams are more comfortable than ever with balanc-
ing a wide suite of PdM tools and techniques in their asset
management programs. This includes internet-enabled tools:
Figure 8 identifies the asset types on which plant teams are
using IIoT equipment – primarily automation and control
WHICH PdM TECHNOLOGIES HAVE YOU DEPLOYED?
Using now In this year’s budget Within 3 years No plans
2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017
Vibration 60.0% 72.1 70.5% 5.8% 7.0% 9.8% 12.9% 9.3% 7.6% 21.3% 11.6% 12.1%
Ultrasound 45.5% 52.3% 59.1% 5.2% 9.3% 12.1% 16.9% 17.4% 7.6% 32.5% 20.9% 21.2%
Acoustic 24.7% 27.1% 34.4% 6.5% 3.5% 5.3% 14.3% 22.4% 16.0% 54.5% 47.1% 44.3%
Corrosion 33.8% 35.3% 45.0% 7.8% 2.4% 3.1% 14.9% 22.4% 10.7% 43.5% 40.0% 41.2%
Infrared 65.8% 66.3% 74.8% 3.9% 7.0% 3.1% 15.5% 10.5% 7.6% 14.8% 16.3% 14.5%
Oil analysis 62.3% 75.6% 73.5% 4.5% 3.5% 5.3% 15.6% 4.7% 6.1% 17.5% 16.3% 15.2%
Predictive modeling software
17.5% 25.9% 20.6% 6.5% 7.1% 10.7% 25.3% 23.5% 19.8% 50.6% 43.5% 48.9%
Electric motor testing
50.0% 45.3% 47.0% 5.8% 9.3% 9.8% 14.9% 23.3% 21.2% 29.2% 22.1% 22.0%
PLEASE RATE THE OBSTACLES LIMITING THE SUCCESS OF YOUR PdM INITIATIVES
Not a factor Low Medium High
2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017
Budget constraints 5.8% 5.8% 6.8% 14.3% 16.3% 18.2% 37.7% 44.2% 40.9% 42.2% 33.7% 34.1%
Undefined financial benefits
9.1% 7.0% 10.6% 18.8% 24.4% 27.3% 46.1% 32.6% 39.4% 26.0% 36.0% 22.7%
Undefined operational benefits
16.9% 14.0% 9.1% 26.6% 22.1% 33.3% 39.6% 37.2% 45.5% 16.9% 26.7% 12.1%
Limited engineering resources
16.2% 11.6% 10.6% 22.7% 24.4% 22.0% 42.9% 39.5% 39.4% 18.2% 24.4% 28.0%
Poor program execution
24.0% 20.9% 16.7% 32.5% 34.9% 25.8% 30.5% 31.4% 40.9% 13.0% 12.8% 16.7%
figure 6
figure 7
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-7-
assets (67.6%), electrical systems (31.8%), and rotational/me-
chanical assets (25.2%). Also, when asked the more-general
question of whether respondents were deploying internet-
enabled technologies at part of their PdM program, numbers
did not change significantly over the past 12 months, with
about 20% of current respondents indicating they are cur-
rently engaged, and 55.6% of respondents saying they had no
plans to deploy these technologies.
It came as a surprise that predictive modeling technolo-
gies declined in reported use by 2017 survey respondents;
after increasing in use by almost 50% from 2014-2016, the
reported use of predictive modeling declined by about 20%
over the past 12 months. This could possibly be the result
of the success of other PdM approaches, where the need for
predictive modeling might be reduced as teams experience
greater success with PdM technologies that deliver condi-
tion monitoring data in real time.
This also may ref lect the trends observed in Figure
7, which charts the stated obstacles to PdM success. Al-
though budget constraints continue to lead all obstacles
reported on the survey, several new trends are emerging.
Specifically, respondents are more confident in their abil-
ity to articulate PdM financial and operational benefits
(62.1% and 57.6%, respectively) than in previous years,
whereas the challenges of “limited engineering resources”
(67.4%) and “poor program execution” (57.6%) are start-
ing to take their place as top-of-mind concerns. In other
words, the PdM roadmaps are coming into stronger fo-
WHO USES THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY YOUR PdM SYSTEMS AND WITH WHAT FREQUENCY?
Never Weekly Monthly Quarterly
2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017 2014 2016 2017
In-house maintenance
8.0% 3.9% 6.2% 59.4% 55.8% 48.7% 20.3% 27.3% 33.6% 12.3 13.0% 11.5%
In-house operations
29.0% 24.7% 32.7% 39.1% 36.4% 34.5% 24.6% 23.4% 16.8% 7.2% 15.6% 15.9%
In-house reliability engineers
31.9% 16.9% 21.2% 40.6% 44.2% 44.2% 16.7% 24.7% 27.4% 10.9% 14.3% 7.1%
Totally outsourced 65.2% 59.7% 76.1% 8.0% 6.5% 6.2% 14.5% 16.9% 10.6% 12.3% 16.9% 7.1%
Third-party remote monitoring
73.9% 74.0% 76.1% 10.9% 3.9% 11.5% 4.3% 7.8% 8.8% 10.9% 14.3% 3.5%
OEM supplier 71.7% 77.9% 69.0% 8.0% 2.6% 6.2% 7.2% 6.5% 12.4% 13.0% 13.0% 12.4%
WHICH TYPES OF ASSETS ARE YOU USING INTERNET-ENABLED / IIoT TECHNOLOGIES TO MANAGE? 2016 2017
figure 9
Automation assets (field devices, control valves)
Control system assets (DCS, I/O, controllers, networks)
Production assets (rotating equipment, mechanical pumps)
Distribution pipelines
Electrical systems
Fleet vehicles
HVAC/R system
Safety systems / devices
Manufacturing productivity
figure 8
19.5%27.2%
20.8%40.0%
27.3%25.2%
6.5%7.9%
24.7%31.8%
9.1%6.0%
13.0%18.5%
15.9%
15.2%
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-8-
cus, but will there be enough skilled staff to deliver on the
predicted promise?
Finally, the types of assets that readers tell us they are manag-
ing via PdM did not change significantly from 2014 to 2017; in
general, respondents consider their production assets the top
priority, followed by electrical, automation, and control systems.
WHO GETS TO SEE YOUR PdM DATA?
One of the more interesting trends uncovered by the PdM
survey over the past several years is the general unwillingness
of respondents to share their data with experts outside of their
organization. The 2017 survey is no exception – you’ve told
us yet again that if you can avoid sharing data with OEMs or
other third parties, then you will.
When it comes specifically to the ability to use remote
monitoring technologies to share data back with OEMs,
the share of respondents who said they were doing this now
dropped from 31.9% in 2016 to 18.6% this year; and the num-
ber of respondents with no plans to do so jumped from 38.5%
to 60.2%. These data aligned with a separate question which
asked whether respondents were using embedded remote
monitoring devices as part of their PdM program. Just shy
of 40% of respondents said yes, which suggests that users are
leveraging embedded devices to monitor the plants they are
being asked to manage remotely, and that they are not always
sharing these data with OEMs.
Figure 9 provides additional nuance to this issue of PdM
data-sharing, with respondents able to drill down into the types
of teams they share their data with as well as the frequency of
sharing. In general, in-house maintenance and reliability teams
have quite frequent access to the data, with most respondents
sharing it weekly (44%–48%) and/or quarterly (27%–33%).
The greatest reluctance on data-sharing is saved for third
parties: a whopping 76.1% of respondents say they have no
plans to share PdM data with third-party remote monitoring
service providers, and 69.0% say they have no plans to share
PdM data with OEMs. The sweet spot, such as it is, seems to be
monthly data sharing, with 12.4% of respondents sharing with
OEMs and 19.4% sharing with other contracted third-parties
(similar to the rate of monthly data-sharing with opera-
tions teams). It’s unclear whether the resourcing or program
execution challenges identified in this year’s PdM survey will
eventually soften the overall resistance to sharing PdM data
outside the organization.
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-9-
Condition Monitoring on the Go, Part 1New portable solutions let you monitor machines from anywhere – even your couch
Portable tools for condition data collection and moni-
toring provide an efficient and economical alternative to
earlier approaches. Portability gives equipment-facing
personnel in operations and maintenance an opportunity to
capture and act on changing conditions as needed – at any
time, from anywhere.
ON-SITE CONDITION REPORTING
Portability is ideal for addressing unexpected or intermit-
tent conditions as well as routine concerns on the plant floor.
The FactoryTalk TeamONE smartphone app from Rockwell
Automation focuses on increasing worker productivity by
providing near-instantaneous incident and device data and
allowing for collaboration among plant-floor, engineering
and IT workers. Incidents are posted in the iOS or Android
app and shared with others for analysis; the identified solu-
tion is then posted for execution.
“We are able to drive a reduction in mean-time-to-repair
through team collaboration, live device diagnostics, and
interactive machine alarms,” says Kyle Reissner, mobility
platform leader at Rockwell Automation.
WALK-AROUND CONDITION MONITORING
Solutions designed for walk-around condition monitoring
let analysts spend less time collecting data and more time
analyzing it. GE’s Bently Nevada SCOUT200 Series is a rug-
ged system that features a lightweight hip-mounted wireless
vibration data collector (the intrinsically safe SCOUT220-
IS model or COMMTEST220 non-IS-rated model) that
streams data via Bluetooth to a durable Android smart-
phone. The system has full connectivity with GE’s System 1
software for diagnostics.
“Portables provide a solid foundation and are a valuable
component in any condition monitoring program,” says
Chris McMillen, GE distributed hardware product manager.
The small, military-grade, IP67-rated Auguscope from
Augury records vibration and ultrasonic sensor data for
mechanical diagnostics, leak detection, pump cavitation,
and steam-trap issues. The technician attaches a mag-
netic sensor to the machine’s body and initiates recording
from his or her smartphone. That data is sent to Augury’s
servers for analysis.
If you can use Facebook or Twitter, then you can use the
Auguscope, suggests Saar Yoskovitz, CEO and co-founder of
Augury. “The Auguscope app combines an extremely intui-
ROCKWELL AUTOMATION
http://plnt.sv/1702TT-01
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-10-
tive user interface with cloud-based algorithms to deliver
real-time machine diagnostics and treatment recommenda-
tions to users’ smartphones,” he says.
The TRIO line of vibration data collectors and analyz-
ers from Azima DLI can be worn on a belt, carried, or
slung over the shoulder by technicians or operators.
TRIO features four simultaneous channels of vibration
data and a dedicated tachometer, plus wireless Bluetooth
acquisition and voice recognition technology that allows
routine or complex troubleshooting data to be collected
from a safe distance.
Putting the data in the cloud gets more people involved
in diagnosis and repair decisions. “Data is data; it is what
you do with it that really matters,” explains Michael
DeMaria, director of product management and training
at Azima DLI.
IMI Sensors manufactures a suite of accelerometers to
optimize walk-around vibration monitoring routes. The
sensors include 5000g+ shock protection to guard against
damage from accidental overloads during sensor mounting
and removal. Integral magnetic bases and/or cables mini-
mize sensor installation time at each individual route stop.
Coiled cables and breakaway connectors enhance conve-
nience and safety for the technician.
“IMI Sensors provides tools that facilitate expeditious
measurements while ensuring the safety of the technician,”
says Meredith Christman, product manager at IMI Sensors.
The OM-DAQXL Series data logger from Omega Engi-
neering is a handheld multichannel touchscreen data logger
available with eight or 16 universal inputs. It is suited for au-
tomation environments in which high-speed measurements
are needed – for example, in chemical, water treatment, or
HVAC process monitoring facilities.
In the plastics industry, for example, the OM-DAQXL can
be used to measure temperature sensors (thermocouples or
RTDs) and pressure transducers used in various types of
plastics processing machinery, including injection-molding
machines and extruders, says Anthony Corvini, DAS and
automation product manager at Omega Engineering.
MOVABLE CONDITION SENSORS
With Fluke Condition Monitoring, rugged wireless sensors
for voltage, current, temperature, and power can be easily
connected and left in place or disconnected and moved
where needed. A gateway receives the sensor signals from
up to 30 feet away and sends the measurements and alarms
to cloud-based software that is viewable from a computer or
mobile device.
“The Fluke Condition Monitoring system allows main-
tenance managers to see more of what is going on in their
plant without needing more people,” says Weishung Liu,
Fluke product planner. “They can even monitor from their
couch.”
Email Contributing Editor Sheila Kennedy, CMRP, managing direc-
tor of Additive Communications, at [email protected].
www.rockwellautomation.comwww.gemeasurement.comwww.augury.comwww.azimadli.comwww.imi-sensors.comwww.omega.comwww.fluke.com
REFERENCE WEBSITES:
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-11-
Asset Monitoring on the Go, Part 2Mobile, multifunctional tools aim to be game-changers for asset health analysis
Asset condition monitoring devices are achieving new
levels of usability, making data collection, analysis, and
corrective actions more efficient and timely. Smartphone-
enabled solutions, multipurpose devices, and an innovative
handheld oil analysis tool allow anomalies to be spotted
earlier and addressed more effectively with collaborative,
intelligent maintenance decisions.
SMARTPHONE-SUPPORTED IR TOOLS
Low-resolution, smartphone-based thermal imagers can
be a powerful new tool for helping monitor assets. Putting
these NDT tools in the hands of operations personnel allows
anomalies to be identified and reported earlier and lets man-
agers plan and schedule minor repairs before further dam-
age occurs, says Rob Miller, reliability director at Stockton
Infrared Thermographic Services.
Attaching a miniature IR camera to an operator’s smart-
phone or tablet allows visual temperature information to
be collected and distributed to maintenance personnel im-
mediately via text or email, Miller explains. “The relatively
low cost of implementing this technology makes it easy to
integrate into existing daily routines,” he says.
To facilitate the collection and trend analysis of IR in-
spection data, new E Sentry Connect asset tags from IRISS
use near-field communication (NFC) Smart Card technol-
ogy that allows contactless communication with Android
smartphones and tablets.
E Sentry Connect tags with embedded maintenance
instructions are deployed on the assets. New readings and
detailed notes entered in an app on the smartphone or tablet
are then recorded onto the tag by “bumping” the tag, ex-
plains Rudy Wodrich, VP of engineering services at IRISS.
The recorded data is uploaded to the cloud the next time
the device connects to the internet, and from there it can be
transferred to an asset management (EAM/CMMS) system.
MULTIFUNCTION VIBRATION DEVICES
User-friendly portable vibration meters record, analyze,
and display vibration signals with a click of a button. The
one-click TPI 9071 smart vibration meter from Test Prod-
ucts International displays color-coded alarm levels for
ISO values and bearing damage units (BDU) readings. It
detects imbalance, misalignment, and overall looseness as
well as more-complex issues.
PRUFTECHNIK
http://plnt.sv/1708TT-01
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT
www.PlantServices.com-12-
“You can buy a vibration data collector with spectrum ca-
pabilities for less than a smartphone and much easier to use
than the smartphone,” says Jim Weidner, vibration special-
ist at TPI. “When you do more-frequent checks, you catch
impending problems such as water in the oil, overheating,
loose and worn belts, and low lubrication.”
A multifunction portable tool for performing route-based
vibration analysis of rotating machinery is the OneProd
Falcon Smart Data Collector from VibrAlign. Designed for
efficiency, it has built-in features including a digital camera, a
strobe light, a spot pyrometer, a bar-code scanner, voice anno-
tation, two-channel balancing, a wireless triaxial sensor, and
patent-pending Accurex automatic diagnosis software.
“Accurex uses proprietary technologies to diagnose
machine problems such as imbalance, misalignment, fric-
tion, gear defects, and cavitation within seconds, next to
the machine,” says Brian Shanovich, ACOEM product line
manager at VibrAlign. It also displays confidence and sever-
ity levels and offers suggested actions.
The Vibxpert II from Pruftechnik is a handheld tool for
efficient route-based data collection, vibration analysis,
and field balancing. It can also be used to perform ac-
ceptance measurements of newly produced or installed
rotating equipment. “One- or two-plane balancing and
advanced diagnostic tools such as FFT coast-down, bump
tests, or modal analysis can be used in the off-route mea-
surement and analysis mode,” says Florian Buder, CEO at
Pruftechnik North America.
Pruftechnik’s associated Omnitrend software allows users
to manage their assets based on machine-specific vibration
data. Optional automatic measurement location identifica-
tion with Pruftechnik’s Vibcode transducer is designed to
maximize data quality during route measurements.
PORTABLE INFRARED OIL ANALYSIS
Reliability engineers can conduct oil analysis on their
maintenance route via the FluidScan handheld infrared
oil analyzer from Spectro Scientific. FluidScan provides
quantitative measurement of dissolved and free water us-
ing infrared spectroscopy, explains Randi Price, senior ap-
plications chemist at Spectro Scientific. “This allows rapid,
on-site determination of water contamination for critical
pieces of machinery, such as turbines, without having to
wait for results to come back from a lab,” Price says.
FluidScan uses a built-in library of more than 700 oils
and reliable calibrations to accurately report key parameters
including oxidation, water, TAN, and TBN. It helps provide
an overall picture of oil chemistry and contamination.
Email Contributing Editor Sheila Kennedy, CMRP, managing direc-
tor of Additive Communications, at [email protected].
www.stocktoninfrared.comwww.iriss.comwww.testproductsintl.comwww.vibralign.comwww.pruftechnik.comwww.spectrosci.com
REFERENCE WEBSITES:
PLANT SERVICES: MARKET RESEARCH REPORT