E-BOOK

The condition monitoring

comparison guide
Find out which technologies work best to keep centrifugal pumps from causing unplanned
downtime in critical industrial processes.

CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
Contents The anatomy of a centrifugal pump 03

Condition monitoring in centrifugal pumps 04

Infrared thermography 05
Vibration analysis 05
Acoustic emission analysis 05
Oil analysis 06
MCSA + voltage 06

When will you see a failure coming? 07

Example 1: Early bearing damage 09
Example 2: Cavitation 10
Example 3: Stator winding short circuit 11

Energy and performance insights 12

Summary table 13

Conclusion 14

Contact 14

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 03

The anatomy of a centrifugal pump

From food and water to fuels, soaps, paper, medicines and more,
centrifugal pumps are a mainstay in the industrial processes that
nourish our modern lives. They work to move fluids under all kinds of
conditions, often round the clock. Exposure to chemicals, detritus and
other contaminants can damage the seals, bearings, impellers,
couplings and other moving parts in these industrial workhorses.
Suboptimal operating conditions can give rise to cavitation and
recirculation, which over time will also damage the pump's
components.
For a fair comparison, we’re assuming all techniques are operating
in an industrial internet of things (IIoT) environment, automatically
transmitting a continuous stream of data to an analysis platform
without requiring sensors to be read out manually.
Motor current
signature analysis
MCSA

Condition monitoring systems can help pump owners avoid all of these,
OA AE
by detecting upcoming equipment failure at an early stage. The best Oil
Acoustic
AI+IIoT emission
condition monitoring systems can also signal suboptimal operating analysis
analysis
conditions in real time, so operators can steer pumps back to their best
efficiency points and prevent many types of damage from developing in
the first place. VA
IR

This document will compare the most common condition monitoring

techniques—infrared thermography, vibration analysis, acoustic Infrared Vibration
emission analysis, oil analysis and motor current signal analysis—on thermography analysis
their merits in centrifugal pumps. (For a more in-depth look at the
underlying technologies, see our general guide to condition monitoring.) Figure 1. Five common condition monitoring techniques, which can provide
24/7 data collection and analysis using AI and the IIoT.

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS

Condition monitoring in centrifugal pumps
Common centrifugal pump issues include seal, impeller and bearing
failures, cavitation, and motor failures. Each of these issues
manifests in a different way, which means that different sensors
will pick up on a developing issue at different points in time—or
sometimes simply too late. This means it’s important to select the
right type of condition monitoring system for the issues you want to
prevent.
A general note on sensor placement
An additional consideration in selecting the right condition
monitoring technique is whether the environment in which it
operates allows for maximum performance. All condition
monitoring sensors are sensitive pieces of electronic equipment,
and in general they must be shielded from environmental extremes:
very high or low temperatures, high humidity, strong magnetic
fields, shocks, corrosive substances, dirt and grit, and so on.
Sensors that require placement on or near the pump, such as those
used for vibration analysis, oil analysis, infrared thermography and
acoustic emission analysis, are notoriously difficult to install on
pumps in hard-to-reach places (such as submerged pumps and
E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps
04
pumps encased within larger machines). What's more, exposure to
chemicals, moisture and other environmental hazards can damage
them, leading to faulty data or even breakdown.
Systems based on motor current signature analysis don't have
these limitations. Because their sensors reside in the motor control
cabinet and not on the asset itself, they are both easy to install and
shielded from the harsh conditions in which water-system
equipment operates. A single motor control cabinet also contains
the power lines for multiple motors, further reducing the cost and
time to install MCSA-based sensors for several pumps or other
assets.
Now let’s look at the general pros and cons of each technique for
use with a centrifugal pump.
CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 05

Condition monitoring in centrifugal pumps: five common techniques

Infrared thermography
IR Thermography excels at spotting crack formation and corrosion fatigue in concrete, metal and fiberglass, making it a great
technology to monitor damage to a pump's casing or connected piping. Subsurface changes in a material's composition alter its
thermal signature, producing minute temperature differences too small to be seen, but easily picked up through AI analysis of the
resulting data. However, as IR requires a direct line of sight to the object it’s monitoring, it’s less suitable than other techniques for
detecting internal faults such as pump cavitation and bearing degradation.

Vibration analysis
Vibration analysis is a proven technique to detect many equipment failures at an early stage, including bearing failures and
VA cavitation. Vibration sensors installed at specific locations in the drive train enable detailed condition monitoring at the component
level, but require multiple sensors per asset. To monitor a vertically mounted centrifugal pump, for example, you’ll need to install at
least three sensors—two at 90-degree angles near the top bearing and a third near the pump casing—per frequency range of interest
to take advantage of this component-level monitoring capability. Aside from the cost of so many sensors, there's feasibility to
consider. If you can't install sensors in all the places you need them—which might be the case for submerged pumps—you lose this
advantage.

Acoustic emission analysis

AE is great at detecting surface and near-surface cracks, delamination and fatigue in concrete, metal and fiberglass. If the sensors
AE are placed correctly, it can be a good choice to catch cavitation. It's less suitable for the lower fault frequencies of other typical
mechanical and electrical issues. Like IR, AE needs a direct line of sight (or, in this case, sound) to the object it's monitoring; it also
needs to be close to the object. As for VA, that makes AE less suitable for pumps in harsher and less accessible environments.

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 06

Oil analysis
OA Oil analysis is great for monitoring equipment that has metal parts that move against each other, such as gears and bearings. OA is
quick to detect the presence of external contaminants such as particles or water—though constant exposure would wreak havoc on
permanently installed oil sensors. As a result, periodic manual oil sampling and analysis using onsite kits during planned operational
stops will often be the best available solution (one far inferior to continuous IIoT monitoring). This limitation also makes OA an
expensive and time-consuming choice for large numbers of assets.

MCSA + voltage
MCSA MCSA-based systems excel at spotting electrical problems, such as broken rotor bars and developing stator winding shortcuts in the
AC motor driving the pump. They’re also great at spotting cavitation, and at detecting and localizing mechanical problems in
straightforward systems like single-stage pumps. Since MCSA sensors install in the motor control cabinet (MCC), there's no danger
they'll be damaged by chemicals, moisture or the elements.

That sensor location has another advantage: centralized installation. You can monitor multiple AC motors and the pumps they're
driving from a single MCC.

MCSA also has some downsides. First, it only works on equipment driven by an AC induction motor. It can't be used for DC-driven
equipment, and it won't detect damage to connected structures like tank walls until very late, if at all. MCSA-based systems are also
a poor choice to track down piping leaks.

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 07

When will you see a failure coming?

By now we’ve discussed a number of common failure modes occurring in centrifugal pumps: cavitation, seal and bearing wear, and electrical faults.
Each of these failure modes has a unique fingerprint in terms of vibration, noise, heat, oil changes and so forth. Some of these fingerprints are so
pronounced that a sensor can pick them up as soon as they start to develop; others don’t reach a measurable level until system failure is imminent.
(Think smoke.) That means it’s important to choose a condition monitoring technology that excels at seeing the problems you want to detect at an
early stage.

The P-F curve displays this information in visual

form. P stands for potential failure; F stands for
P2
functional failure. The P-F interval is the time Figure 2. Sample P-F curve showing
between when we notice that a machine is starting to A P4 how soon a condition monitoring
deteriorate (point P) and when the machine actually P1 P3 technique will alert you to
fails (point F). There's a third point, A, which is when upcoming failure.
P5
Asset condition

the machine first begins to degrade. The closer P is

Pnoise
to A for a given condition monitoring system, the
better. The sooner you detect a developing fault, the
less damage the machine will suffer, the less energy
it will waste, and the less it will cost to service it.
Pheat
Psmoke
PREDICTIVE CORRECTIVE REACTIVE

F
Time

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS

Now let’s take a look at a number of failures you might encounter in
a centrifugal pump and see where the different available techniques
end up on the P-F curve.
Note that the P-F curve is a highly tailored graph that depends on
the specifics of the equipment, the failure mode and the
production environment. It will differ even for two identical
machines in the same process—or for the same machine on
different days (summer or winter, more or fewer nearby machines
running, etc.) That makes it all but impossible to generalize
sensibly. For that reason, we’ve divided the P-F curves in this
document into three sections— predictive, corrective, and reactive—
and put each technology into one of those sections, based on how
soon it will generally detect the example fault and how well it can
identify the likely root cause.
Technologies in the predictive section will detect a developing fault
very soon after it begins, before it does lasting collateral damage.
(Consider a loose coupling: if you catch it right away, you can simply
tighten it.) They also do well at identifying most root causes.
E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps
08
Technologies in the corrective section won’t detect a developing
fault until some collateral damage has been done: in our coupling
example, this might be excessive wear on the gearbox bearings.
This is also where technologies that detect a problem early, but
don't do so well at identifying the root cause, will go.
Technologies in the reactive section are, in the context of the
specific situation the P-F curve is describing, last-ditch remedies.
Generally, so much damage will have been done by the time the
problem is detected that multiple components will need
replacement. In our example, one of the two shafts connected by
the coupling may crack from the added wear. At the extreme, you
run the system to failure. This is also where we'll put technologies
that are poor at identifying root causes for the example fault.
(There’s a fourth section we could add to the graph on the far left:
proactive. This is where you choose the right equipment for the job:
in our example, a coupling that’s rated for the correct power,
torque, starting load and so on. But that’s outside the realm of
condition monitoring.)
CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 09

Example 1: Early bearing damage

Figure 3 shows a sample P-F curve for a failing bearing in the motor driving a submersible pump. Bearing damage can be the visible fallout of widely
different root causes, from shaft misalignment to water contamination to a poorly grounded electrical system.

VA & AE will be the first to alert you to most types of bearing damage. However, this requires having the right kind and number of sensors installed on
the bearing, which can be expensive and impractical, especially in submerged equipment.

OA is the only technique that can identify fluid

contamination in the bearing. It will generally be later
than VA & AE to detect other causes of bearing Figure 3. Sample P-F curve for bearing
degradation. A failure in a submersible pump motor.
PVA Only AI + IIoT techniques achieve
MCSA rivals VA & AE performance for bearings in the predictive performance.
PAE
POA
motor, but it's a poorer choice for bearings further
Asset condition

PMCSA
down the drive train. That said, in submerged
equipment MCSA may be the only option for robust
data capture. It will also be the first to identify PIR
electrical sources of bearing damage.

IR can detect thermal changes that indicate

PREDICTIVE CORRECTIVE REACTIVE
developing bearing damage, but as with VA & AE, this
is impractical for submerged equipment (barring a
F
built-in thermocouple, but that's not IR). IR also Time
cannot identify the reason for the rise in temperature.

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 10

Example 2: Cavitation

Figure 4 shows a sample P-F curve for a cavitating pump. Though cavitation is not itself a failure that will stop the pump from working, over time it will
lead to erosion damage, seal and bearing wear, and possibly sudden impeller breakage. Prolonged cavitation shortens a pump's lifespan and wastes
energy.

The top choices for detecting cavitation are vibration

analysis, acoustic analysis, and motor current
signature analysis. All three of these techniques will
pick up on the collapsing air bubbles that signal
cavitation. Figure 4. Sample P-F curve for a cavitating
A centrifugal pump. Only AI + IIoT
Infrared thermography and oil analysis are poor PMCSA techniques achieve predictive
choices. Though some research has shown that IR PVA performance.
PAE
Asset condition

can detect the minimal thermal changes that occur

during cavitation, the camera must have a direct line
of sight to the fluid, which is impractical in an
industrial production pump. As for OA, the collapsing POA
bubbles have no direct effect on the quality of the
system's lubricant; this technique can only detect the
wear and tear effects that result from long-term
PREDICTIVE CORRECTIVE REACTIVE
cavitation, which makes it too late to prevent
damage. F
Time PIR

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 11

Example 3: Stator winding short circuit

Figure 5 shows a sample P-F curve for a developing short circuit in the stator windings of an induction motor driving a sludge pump. A true short circuit
will stop the motor at once, so the key to predicting this failure mode in advance is detecting changes in the insulation that shields the windings. There
are multiple reasons why insulation might degrade, and these indirect causes of failure determine which technique will perform best.

Heavy vibration can loosen the stator coils and cause them to abrade against the metal housing; VA & AE will be most sensitive to this failure mode.

Overheating from poor ventilation or running the

motor above its rated load can cause thermal
deterioration; IR will be most sensitive to this failure Figure 5. Sample P-F curve for a stator winding
mode. A short in an AC pump motor. Only AI + IIoT
PMCSA techniques achieve predictive
In motors connected through a variable frequency PVA performance.
drive (VFD), the pulse width modulation required to PAE
Asset condition

PIR
simulate the desired AC signal can cause currents
through the insulation, which will degrade it over
time. MCSA will be most sensitive to this failure POA
mode.

OA is the poorest choice here. As with cavitation, it

PREDICTIVE CORRECTIVE REACTIVE
can only detect the wear and tear fallout on the
motor's oil-lubricated bearings and/or connected
F
gears (as in a gearmotor), rather than the source of Time
the developing fault.

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 12

Energy and performance insights

Tracking down developing problems before they

cause disaster is the prime reason companies
adopt a condition monitoring technology. It’s
what they’re made to do, after all. But MCSA +
voltage has an additional advantage: it can
report on the energy efficiency of your
monitored assets and processes.

It takes both current and voltage

measurements to make that possible. In short,
if you know the current and voltage a motor is
drawing, you can calculate its operational
efficiency. You can use that same data to
calculate the ideal motor for that process, and
to calculate whether the process is inefficient
by design. (Download our sustainable industry
white paper for more information.)

Current and voltage also make it possible for MCSA systems to Over time, this curve will also show you where you can save energy
display a real-time pump curve, so you can go beyond detecting on your pumps. If your company is looking for metrics to help you
damage to proactively keep your pumps operating near their shrink your environmental footprint, an MCSA + voltage system can
best efficiency point for longer lifetimes and fewer repairs. help you feed two birds with one scone.

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 13

Summary table
VA OA IR AE MCSA MCSA
+v

Legend Remote or inaccessible assets

VA – vibration analysis
ATEX or other harsh conditions
OA – oil analysis
IR – infrared thermography
Noisy or vibrating environments
AE – acoustic analysis
MCSA – motor current signature analysis
One motor driving many assets L L L M M
MCSA + v – MCSA + voltage

L – downside: requires individual sensors for each Cracks and corrosion fatigue
component of interest to capture data for the
entire load behind the motor. Upside: can pinpoint Mechanical faults
failure to that specific component.
Electrical faults
M – upside: one set of sensors can capture data for
the entire load behind the motor. Downside: if Direct current (DC)
these components are similar, only faults arising
in the motor can be accurately localized to the Rotating machinery
failing component. Faults in the driven equipment
will be detected but not pinpointed to a specific Very slowly rotating machinery
component.
  Energy & performance insights

Table 1. Summarizing what we've discussed: what each condition monitoring technology does well (blue check mark) and
not so well (no check mark). (For in-depth discussion of all the entries in the table, see our general guide to condition
monitoring.)

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
 14

Conclusion

There you have it: a brief comparison of how the major condition
monitoring techniques perform in centrifugal pumps. We hope this
guide helps you choose the best system for your pumps. Or
systems—there’s no reason you can’t use two or more
technologies for pumps that should never, ever fail.

If MCSA + voltage is among your selection, we’d be happy to tell

you more about our solution, SAM4. Please contact us to book a
no-obligation demo at your convenience.

Contact Passionate about solving the

problem of unplanned
Lars Ligtenberg downtime, Semiotic Labs
Sales development representative uses AI-driven electrical
lars@semioticlabs.com waveform analysis to create
smart predictive maintenance
+31 653 325 256
solutions that increase
productivity while saving
www.semioticlabs.com
customers' time and money.

E-book | The condition monitoring comparison guide for centrifugal pumps CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS