Archive | April, 2017

122

6:29 pm
April 25, 2017
Print Friendly

White Paper | Making Machines Smarter Through Machine Learning

1704iicwpA new white paper from the Industrial Internet Consortium (www.iiconsortium.org) , titled, “Making Factories Smarter Through Machine Learning,” offers a great read on how machine learning can allow for better edge analytics, reduce data streams and promote better data fidelity.

A passage from the White Paper below:

The other capability provided by the software is the ability to read complex sensors and perform pre-processing in terms of data reduction: For example, vibration is sampled at least two times the vibration frequency. In this case, a fast Fourier transform is performed and only the frequency of interest is stored. This is an area where there is high opportunity for more efficient processing – effectively using machine learning for pre-processing and feature selection.

Therefore, it (SoC) can sample each variable with smart criterions: For example, temperature may not be measured with the same frequency of vibration

The white paper provides a real roadmap solution on how to move from preventive, SoC machine learning and simple industrial networking solutions to make this happen. The link to the white paper can be found here.

Download the White Paper >>

Industrial Internet Consortium
http://www.iiconsortium.org/

1601Iot_logoFor more IIoT coverage in maintenance and operations, click here! 

221

4:23 pm
April 25, 2017
Print Friendly

Vibration Machine Learning from the Industrial Internet Consortium

machine learning architecture for CNC machines

Figure 1: The elements and the connectivity being utilized to develop and provide updates to the production system.

Some industry analysts aren’t happy with overused buzzwords like “machine learning” or even “deep machine learning” taking the place of “IIoT” in the hype category. I agree these new buzzwords are ubiquitous in many media corners and deep machine learning is mostly found in R&D.

However, a white paper or deep dive is a great way to see what is possible for predictive analytics in the field or factory. A new white paper from the Industrial Internet Consortium, titled, “Making Factories Smarter Through Machine Learning,” offers a great read on how machine learning can allow for better edge analytics, reduce data streams and promote better data fidelity.

The white paper examines the ability of CNC machines to reduce data streams via machine learning with the use of the Plethora IIoT platform and system-on-chip engineering (SoC). The SoC technology allows for customized software to create application-specific requirements, such as data filtering being sent from machines.

A passage from the White Paper below:

The other capability provided by the software is the ability to read complex sensors and perform pre-processing in terms of data reduction: For example, vibration is sampled at least two times the vibration frequency. In this case, a fast Fourier transform is performed and only the frequency of interest is stored. This is an area where there is high opportunity for more efficient processing – effectively using machine learning for pre-processing and feature selection.

Therefore, it (SoC) can sample each variable with smart criterions: For example, temperature may not be measured with the same frequency of vibration

The white paper provides a real roadmap solution on how to move from preventive maintenance to SoC machine learning and industrial networking solutions. The link to the white paper can be found here.

1601Iot_logoFor more IIoT coverage in maintenance and operations, click here! 

129

2:55 pm
April 18, 2017
Print Friendly

On The Floor: Management Rapport? Thumbs Up and Down

Mechanical and electrical plant roomsBy Jane Alexander, Managing Editor

For some reason, the following question about management rapport really kicked MT Reader Panelists into high gear this month. Lots of them (more than usual) wanted to express their opinions (some in far more detail than they typically provide). The result is that we can’t include all responses on these two pages. 

Q: What was the state of rapport between their sites’ plant-floor reliability and/or maintenance teams (or their clients’/customers’ teams) and upper management, and why?

Here are a few of the responses we received. As usual, they’ve been edited for clarity and brevity.

Industry Consultant, West…
Management rapport [with maintenance and reliability teams] is one of the main indicators I use when working at a new [client] site. If there’s tension between these departments, there will be communication breakdowns—virtually every time.  Performance will suffer greatly, and each group will blame the others.

In general, I find a good, strong, open, and honest working relationship in less than 30% of my clients’ operations.  If I can resolve issues between the groups, and improve relationships, the parts of the maintenance and reliability puzzle fall into place rather easily. In the age of e-mail, texting, and voicemail, however, it’s much easier for silos to exist and not handle issues face-to-face.  In my opinion, it seems to be getting easier to let site relationships erode rather than repair them.

Maintenance Technician, Discrete Mfg, North America…
Not the greatest here (always a struggle because upper management is constantly looking to cut corners). They call it risk management, yet when something goes wrong, they panic. Some of our older equipment has been paid for many times over. Now, though, we’re into a stage where it’s hard to get parts for this equipment. We [our team] really tries to stress the importance of preventive maintenance (PMs) and taking care of things, as in “if you take care of your stuff, your stuff will take care of you.” But it becomes frustrating when that idea seems to fall on deaf ears and they [management] seem to dodge another bullet. (This opinion is based on personal experience; I’ve been working in this plant for many years.)

Industry Supplier, Southeast…
With regard to my customers, management rapport, in most cases, is still not very good. I work with a lot of plants where plant-floor staff need help, but must get upper management to buy in. Most preventive-maintenance (PM) personnel don’t have the knowledge to make their case. When I’m able to meet with both sides at the table and pitch ROI (return on investment), it seems that they begin to understand each other better, i.e., that the ROI for Management is dollars and the ROI of PM teams is reduced failures and workload.

Reliability Specialist, Power Sector, Midwest…
Our team has an excellent rapport with all levels of the organization.  The secret to good rapport is to not only talk the talk, but to walk the talk. The site’s PdM/PM program mission is to use our knowledge and appropriate technologies on the facility’s assets to provide the operating group safe, efficient, and reliable equipment.  In the same manner, we are to use our knowledge and available technologies to safely and effectively reduce the facility’s operating and maintenance costs.

Industry Supplier, Midwest…
It’s ugly (management rapport, that is)! Many of my plant-floor customers have lost budgets and been reduced to performing reactive work, as opposed to proactive maintenance. They’re dealing with plants that are already in bad shape and disrepair, and answering to management that still wants to run full production. They have no inventories, no spares, and no orders for items with extremely long lead times. It’s not a pretty picture. One ray of hope [a slight improvement] is that site management is now being forced to go to corporate for monies and also discuss why equipment was allowed to go so long without repair. The overall situation, though, leads to pain and agony for those having to do work, that, if it had been done when needed, would have been a simple fix, not a catastrophic fix.  

Industry Consultant, North America…
There’s no guarantee that upper management has a solid understanding of reliability excellence. This is especially true if no executive-level stakeholder exists. Quite often, the focus from the top is solely on cost management (not on failure prevention or defect elimination.) In my experience as a consultant, a common complaint at the working level has focused on incoherent, ongoing initiatives that aren’t solidly linked to goals. This issue could be resolved if long-range plans were created based, say, on ranking of each initiative by priority and benefit and then stretching them out over a period of time. Leadership should encourage these types of plans for excellence, and involve plant personnel in their definition.

Maintenance Leader, Discrete Mfg, Midwest…
As noted in some of my past Reader Panel responses, maintenance used to be the redheaded stepchild at our facility. The problem started with the fact that plant managers and senior managers seemed to come and go [change] frequently. Because of this, “flavor of the month” programs were the norm. This changed with the arrival of an outside consulting firm. When upper management listened to suggestions and our plant-floor personnel saw that their ideas were listened to, maintenance took ownership. This made a big difference with proactive versus reactive work. We’re now getting our preventive maintenance work done as well. Things are looking good.

Reliability Engineering Leader, Process Mfg, South…
If I had been asked this question a couple of years ago, I would have characterized the relationship between management and plant-floor teams as indifferent. It wasn’t adversarial, but more a matter of management viewing maintenance as a necessary evil than a competitive advantage.  That has changed significantly. Last year, leadership announced PM Completion Rate (with a target of 95%) as one of the top metrics for the company. That was a real game changer. Suddenly, everybody was interested in preventive maintenance—it had become part of their personal-performance expectations. Respect for the importance of scheduled maintenance compliance made a dramatic shift, and we exceeded our PM-completion target.  This coming year, unscheduled asset downtime is being added to the top company metrics and will be reviewed on a monthly basis by executive management. This is a clear example of how leadership from the top can really drive change. 

Industry Consultant, International
In answer to your question, this situation [management rapport problems] is brought on by local company politics, lack of training, and basic mismanagement among, other things.

While I’ve worked with various clients, including some where severe adversarial relationships existed between Maintenance and Production/ Upper Management, by coaching ALL responsible parties that state of the art reliability and maintenance saves money, increases OEE (overall equipment effectiveness), improves uptime, and increases productivity, etc. I have convinced maintenance and top management that maintenance/reliability is a business partner NOT a “ we break it/you fix it” stepchild.

After training of top-level maintenance, production and sometimes even general management personnel by professionals in reliability and maintenance management, common goals are identified and cooperation is much improved. Accountants watch the bottom line weighing these additional consultant/training costs against expense reductions and production improvements. Results are that teamwork builds and floor-operations to staff-level relationships smooth out.

“Equipment Ownership,” in selected cases, brings hourly production and maintenance crafts together and reinforces the hourly–personnel through management relationship. Although this has, at times raised, the eyebrows of union officers, they usually go along when the benefits to all are obvious.

Yes, I have seen too many operations where maintenance and production departments, which usually have the ear of top management, DO NOT have a smooth relationship. However, with the proper training and education of all concerned, this can usually be much improve to the economic and management benefit of all.

Plant Engineer, Institutional Facilities, Midwest
With regard to management rapport, for several months, maintenance (trades) forepersons at our institution have had to attend not only new-construction meetings, but even small-project meetings. The idea is that we (Maintenance) can add our concerns before, during, and after projects are completed. The problem with all this is how much time it takes. With so many projects and associated meetings [at our site] and the number of normal maintenance-type meetings we have, we almost always have at least one supervisor sitting in meetings 30 to 40 hours per week. Work for anybody attending these meetings gets pushed back and can delay repairs. It also creates more work for the people not attending.

Another problem we have is that only the person attending the meeting knows what was discussed and/or is coming up. Consequently, that individual has knowledge that other supervisors don’t. The system would work a lot better if one person could attend all the meetings and email a recap of each event so every supervisor would know where each project stands and what’s coming up, whether in his or her area/zone or not.

While most meetings cover such a wide variety of subjects that only 10% to 20% of their agendas can be devoted to individual trades, attendees must listen to everything. It would be better, if you were going to have a one-hour meeting, to break it down into four parts, i.e., plumbing, electrical, mechanical, architectural/structural. This way, a supervisor could attend only the part of the meeting during which his or her area was discussed, not the entire meeting, and, if email recaps were sent out, could still keep up with everything that transpires.

Engineer, Industry Supplier, Southeast
Management’s responsibilities are meeting production deadlines and goals while keeping operating costs to a minimum. The relationship between management and maintenance depends on how management views their maintenance program. Some management personnel look at maintenance as a cost center while others recognize it as a cost savings mechanism or in best case, the profit center. Understanding that maintenance is a part of the cost of the product being created softens the financial burden but also gives management a better perspective regarding the value their maintenance teams bring to the table.

Ours is an equipment-service operation that’s deeply involved in working with our customers to improve their PdM programs. As such we continue to invest a great deal of time educating upper management regarding the benefits of early detection of issues that will lead to premature failures as well as on-going inefficiencies. The more informed management becomes about heading off potential problems, and the tools and preventive measures available, the more they become involved with their maintenance teams. Informed managers will interact with their teams quicker and to a greater extent. Sometimes comparing the benefits of outsourcing major PdM activities is more appealing and acceptable to management personnel as it leaves their operators and technicians time to complete their daily routine assignments.

Maintenance personnel generally understand the need for planned routine maintenance. Their relationship with upper management is greatly improved when their leaders are also informed. Education is the key to improving the relationship between upper management and their maintenance teams as well as a way of improving efficiency and operational success of the facility. MT

Tip of the Month

“Add RED and GREEN colors to the face of standard pressure gauges. This allows anyone who looks at or takes readings on a single gauge (or dozens) to tell right away if a pressure is too low or too high. I’ve worked on equipment and in test labs where this little addition could have saved a lot of time and money, and helped any operator.”

Tipster: Plant Engineer, Institutional Facilities, Midwest (an MT Reader Panelist)

What about you?
Tips and tricks that you use in your work could be value-added news to other reliability and maintenance pros. Let us help you share them. Email your favorites to MTTipster@maintenancetechnology.com. Who knows? You might see your submission(s) highlighted in this space at some point. (Anyone can play. You don’t need to be an
MT Reader Panelist.)

76

7:50 pm
April 14, 2017
Print Friendly

Engine OEM Identifies New Business Service

160720catlogoDisruption is an overused word in technology, but Joe Barkai’s tagline to his book about IIoT says it all: How the Industrial Internet of Things is Changing Every Business. For Mak, a supplier of engines to the maritime industry, that means changing their business model to focus and recognize that servicing their large engines remotely isn’t some wild science fiction fantasy. It’s a reality for OEMs as end users move toward IIoT strategies.

The maritime engine supplier is partnering with Caterpillar Marine Asset Intelligence (www.cat.com) and will create a condition monitoring approach for the first project. This project includes an M46 DF dual-fuel engine and will provide real-time monitoring on the ship.

“This effort enables operations and maintenance leaders to make better decisions using data and analytics, helping to drive reduced cost, downtime and risk,” says Ken Krooner, Technology & Operations Manager for Caterpillar Marine Asset Intelligence.

According to Caterpillar Marine, “the onboard analytics and user interface provide the onboard crew with real-time information, such as the condition of their equipment and what they should do about any potential issues.”

More importantly, the analytics software allows for multi-level reporting.

“At the highest level, there are high-level dashboards and reports which can provide a variety of graphs and data visualizations, including vessel performance curves, efficiency comparisons, custom metrics, geophysical location, says Leslie Bell-Friedel, global business mgr. at Caterpillar Marine Asset Intelligence in an interview for a company publication. At a detailed engineering level, there are simple red-yellow-green indicators for each piece of equipment that summarize the current and projected condition, as well as the ability to drill deep to understand the health and performance of a piece of equipment.”

Also, qualified data can be seen ashore, where additional automated analytics are used to analyze the data — both from an individual vessel as well as from a fleet perspective — and where experts are on hand to review the analytic output and apply their experience to it. Access to the analytics can be done via any web-based device, either onshore or remotely. At this point, there’s no app available.

Click here to read the Bell-Friedel’s interview >>

1601Iot_logoFor more IIoT coverage in maintenance and operations, click here! 

306

8:19 pm
April 13, 2017
Print Friendly

Uptime: Aligning ‘Our’ Goals With Business Goals

bobmugnewBy Bob Williamson, Contributing Editor

Cut expenses. Boost performance. Those are among the goals of many businesses. Frequently, though—too frequently, in fact—maintenance managers find themselves between a rock and a hard place: improving maintenance while reducing costs.

By its very nature, the maintenance function is a business expense. As an extreme, we could eliminate the entire maintenance budget as a cost-cutting measure. Having done that, the business would suffer under significantly more expensive run-to-failure equipment-management practices, leading to increased costs of repair and lost revenues from unpredictable/unplanned equipment and facilities downtime.

Maintenance can be defined as “actions for sustaining a desired level of equipment performance.” From a maintenance professional’s perspective, the big picture is more about sustaining desired levels of business performance.

Let’s be clear, we could be discussing the maintenance department as we explore the principles of aligning maintenance with business goals. But, when reviewing the scope of maintenance work, we must think and look well beyond the maintenance department and consider the maintenance function, regardless of the organization(s) performing the work. This is a crucial distinction when it comes to the alignment of goals.

Typically, the maintenance department is perceived as the party that’s responsible for the health and well being of equipment and facilities. Yet, many (if not most) of the causes of unhealthy and poorly performing equipment and facilities go well beyond the scope of the maintenance department. As a result, maintenance basically gets to address the symptoms, not the true causes, of problems.

Efficiency vs. effectiveness

The noted business-management consultant, author, and educator Peter Drucker defined efficiency and effectiveness this way:

• Efficiency: Doing things right—able to accomplish something with the least waste of time and effort. (Focuses on process).

• Effectiveness: Doing the right things—producing the intended or expected result. (Focuses on results, outcomes, throughput).

Just because maintenance is performed efficiently does not necessarily mean that it is effective.

NASCAR race-team pit crews offer an excellent example. An efficient pit stop can be performed in record time. The pit crew’s work processes are highly efficient. But, if they always change four tires while only two tires are showing signs of performance-handling wear, pit stops are ineffective.

In the business context of auto racing and pit stops, it’s not the responsibility of the pit crew (let’s call it the “maintenance crew”) to determine how many tires to change. The crew chief (let’s call him or her the “maintenance manager”) reviews previous tire-performance data, compared with vehicle handling, as reported by the driver, and determines the tire-changing tasks to be completed during each pit stop.

After all, the goal of a race is not only flawless work execution (efficiency) by the pit crew, but also performance of pit stops in a manner that ensures the business goal of winning the race is a top priority (effectiveness).

All too often, we focus primarily on measuring and improving maintenance efficiency, including, among other things, preventive-maintenance (PM)-schedule compliance, mean time to repair, actual hours/planned hours, planning variance, and preventive/predictive-maintenance (PM/PdM) yield. While activities (or actions) associated with these measurements and improvements lead to excellent maintenance practices, they must be balanced with maintenance effectiveness.

Aligning maintenance functions with business goals assures maintenance effectiveness. Maintenance actions then contribute to the goals of the business.

This business line of sight reflects alignments from the upper-most purposes of an enterprise, down to plant-floor work execution.

This business line of sight reflects alignments from the upper-most purposes of an enterprise, down to plant-floor work execution.

Line of sight

I’ve discussed asset-management standards and the importance of aligning an organization’s work processes with their goals in numerous Maintenance Technology columns over the years. Both the PAS-55:2008 Asset Management Specification and ISO55000: 2014 Asset Management Standard refer to the importance of aligning asset-management practices to the goals of the business. PAS-55 referred to this alignment as a “line of sight” designed to assure the effectiveness of such practices.

Let’s use the chart on p. 6 to drill down through a typical line of sight, from the upper-most purposes of an enterprise, all the way to work execution on the plant floor. Since business terminology varies widely, here are my clarifications and some examples for this diagram:

• Business Opportunity (our market/customers/requirements)

• Shareholder/Owner Expectations (return on the investment)

• Organization’s Mission-Vision (who we are and where we want to be)

• Strategic Themes, Policy Statements (guiding principles)

• Strategic Business Plan (what and why)

• Business Goals (what we want to accomplish)

• Key Performance Indicators (measuring what is critical: financial, customer, process, people, and/or regulatory)

• Objectives/Strategic Initiatives (what and how)

• Organizational Structures (our divisions/cost centers/departments/shifts/crews)

• Job Roles & Responsibilities, Job Requirements (who, what, where, when)

• Work Processes, Methods, Procedures, Systems (how work should/shall be performed)

• Work Execution (performance management—how well).

Top-down/bottom-up

There are two ways to approach line-of-sight alignment. Most organizations view it from a top-down perspective to define their respective business models and what they should measure to determine whether they’re on a successful path. Their KPIs (key performance indicators) often provide necessary measures of success.

From a bottom-up perspective, we see Work Execution reflecting the fundamental actions required to meet the Business Goals as measured by the KPIs. The two paths (top-down and bottom-up) meet in the middle—aligned toward the same KPIs.

Connecting and aligning Work Execution to the KPIs are some of the most critical links in the process. The KPIs can be made actionable by linking to the appropriate Equipment Utilization Losses (see Uptime, March 2017).

Specific Objectives or Initiatives are determined from the KPIs; Organizational Structures are defined; specific Job Roles & Responsibilities (in various departments) are defined; and Work Processes are developed to define how work is to be performed. All of this leads to the flawless Work Execution that’s necessary to achieve the Business Goals (as in the pit crew example).

Seeking alignment

Aligning the work culture (an organization’s behaviors) with a line of sight to the organization’s business goals begins by communicating the Business Opportunity and how the organization needs to pull in the same direction to take full advantage of it.

Linking maintenance to business goals is only one of many alignments that must exist in successful enterprises. Thus, we must remember that a maintenance department alone cannot effectively maintain equipment and facilities. More and more, we’re learning that the maintenance function is a team sport that requires multiple disciplines (players) brought in at different stages in the life cycle of a physical asset.

Paying attention to maintenance-work processes and efficiency are good things to measure. It’s when we align the outcomes of those processes and efficiencies with business goals that maintenance truly becomes effective in a business model. MT

Bob Williamson, CMRP, CPMM, and member of the Institute of Asset Management, is in his fourth decade of focusing on the “people side” of world-class maintenance and reliability. Contact him at RobertMW2@cs.com.

212

8:01 pm
April 13, 2017
Print Friendly

Listen Up: Stop Lube-Related Bearing Failures

Ultrasound technology can help reduce bearing and equipment failures associated with improper lubrication procedures.

Ultrasound technology can help reduce bearing and equipment failures associated with improper lubrication procedures.

Regardless of industry sector, lubrication methods are crucial to plant reliability and maintenance efforts. Consider the fact that lube-related failures account for 60% to 80% of premature bearing failures. While lack of lubrication and use of the wrong lubricant for an application have been cited as major causes of such failures, over- and under-lubrication are also harmful. Preventing those last two scenarios is one area where ultrasound technology can play an important role.

— Jane Alexander, Managing Editor

According to UE Systems (Elmsford, NY), by using an ultrasound instrument to listen to a bearing while applying lubricant and then monitor, i.e., watch, the decibel level, a technician can determine when adequate grease has been applied and, just as important, the threshold at which over-lubrication begins.

In short, when bearings aren’t lubricated properly, friction can cause damage and threaten processes. Ultrasound equipment can read the decibel levels of over- and under-lubricated bearings and indicate to maintenance personnel if adjustments are in order. Consistent dB levels let a technician know that the level of lubrication is where it should be.

Experts at UE Systems describe three tiers of acceptable lubrication practices and where ultrasound technology fits into them.

randmGood practice

The baseline lubrication practice is to follow the bearing manufacturer’s recommendations to determine the exact amount of lubrication necessary based on bearing size, speed, and type, and rely on runtime and operating conditions to develop a lubrication schedule. While “good” is a starting place, there is room to improve.

Better practice

The next level uses ultrasound equipment for more exact lubrication procedures. These tools tell maintenance technicians when to stop lubricating a bearing, rather than hoping the schedule is accurate and guessing at bearing condition. Ultrasound can also inform technicians if there are other problems with the bearing, unrelated to lubrication.

Best practice

A best lubrication practice is to combine a frequency schedule and ultrasound tools with data collection and trend analysis. By examining the history of lubrication with dB levels and other sound files, maintenance technicians can begin to predict when bearings may be approaching failure and take preemptive action. Alarm levels can be set to alert technicians when lubrication is approaching dangerously low levels.

The best ultrasound programs allow easy integration of data analysis with probes, listening devices, and lubrication tools. MT

How Ultrasound Technology Works

Air- and structure-borne ultrasound is high-frequency sound that human ears can’t hear. These high-frequency sounds travel through the air or by way of a solid. The ultrasound instrument senses and listens for the high-frequency sound, and then translates it into an audible sound that is heard through the inspector’s headset. The unit of measurement for sound is a decibel (dB) level, which is indicated on the display of the ultrasonic instrument.

Ultrasound can be used in conjunction with (and is supportive of) vibration analysis and other predictive-maintenance approaches. In addition to mechanical inspections of rotating equipment and associated condition-based lubrication programs, applications for ultrasound include detection of compressed air and gas leaks; inspection of energized electrical equipment to detect corona, tracking, and arcing; and inspection of steam traps.

For more ultrasound information and to download a printable infographic on “3 Ways to Incorporate Ultrasound in Lubrication Testing,” visit uesystems.com.

146

7:53 pm
April 13, 2017
Print Friendly

Prevent Cable Failure in Dynamic-Cable Tracks

Paying attention to these details can help you reduce the risk of unexpected and costly downtime.

Paying attention to these details can help you reduce the risk of unexpected and costly downtime.

Cable failure within a dynamic-cable track can lead to costly, yet, in most cases, easily avoided, downtime. David Smith of U.S. Tsubaki Power Transmission LLC (Wheeling, IL) points to several important considerations for maximizing the performance life of cables running through your plant’s power-transmission-equipment systems.

— Jane Alexander, Managing Editor

Proper cable selection

Incorrect cable designs are often installed in a dynamic-cable track. Given the high rates of motion and speed under which cable tracks perform, be sure to select and install a cable specifically designed to operate in your particular environment or application.

Proper cable-track sizing

To achieve maximum life from your cables, assure ample amounts of free space within the cable track. At a minimum, cables should have 10% free space around them, with a maximum fill rate within the cable track not to exceed 60%. As the speed and cycle rates of a cable track increase, the cables must have adequate space to operate properly.

It is also imperative for the cable track to have the proper bend radius. Dynamic cables are generally designed to operate with a bend radius that’s greater than 7.5 times the outside diameter of the cable. A tighter radius will reduce the performance life of your cables.

randmStrain relief

Every cable requires effective strain relief as it enters and exits the cable track. This strain relief ensures that proper cable length remains within the track as it cycles back and forth. Insufficient strain relief is one of the most commonly overlooked considerations during cable installation.

Proper strain relief often can be accomplished by simply zip-tying the cables to the strain-relief fingers that have been molded into the cable-track brackets.

Internal vertical dividers

Another often-overlooked consideration involves the use of internal dividers within the cable track. Vertical dividers between the cables ensure that each cable is confined to its proper location and spacing within the track and is unable to cross over or “tangle,” with the other cables. Keeping your cables in proper alignment will help extend their performance.

Cable-carrier material selection

Even with proper strain relief, relative motion between the cables and cable carrier crossbars can result in some scuffing of the cable jackets. By selecting a crossbar design/material that best interacts with the cable jacket material, you can reduce or eliminate that scuffing.

For example, a nylon cable track with aluminum crossbars is much friendlier to the PVC jackets of most electrical cables than a standard glass-fiber nylon cross bar. MT

David Smith is director of sales for the Milwaukee-based KabelSchlepp Division of U.S. Tsubaki Power Transmission LLC. For more information on dynamic-cable tracks and other power-transmission topics, visit ustsubaki.com.

Navigation