Executive Summary
About half of readers responded that they are already using oil condition monitoring equipment, but a small majority still do not find it prudent to replace traditional oil analysis completely with newer technologies. Reasons for continuing to use older methods even as technology advances include needing to verify sensor results in the lab, supply issues, trust in the technology and its security and cost. Readers also have a variety of opinions on new versus retrofitted oil condition monitoring equipment, suggesting that this choice depends on the particular situation, taking into consideration the short- and long-term costs and benefits.
Do you feel that there is a sufficient return on investment (ROI) for online oil condition monitoring?
Yes
74%
No
26%
Based on an informal poll sent to 15,000 TLT readers.
Q.1 With the advances in oil condition monitoring (online sensors), when does oil analysis become outdated?
I don’t think it will; people will always want lab verification of sensor results.
It never does as some of these online monitors have issues as well. It’s best to always send out samples to confirm that everything is working and in check.
I’m not sure oil analysis will ever lose its importance in helping to monitor fluid condition and component condition.
Real-time monitoring rather than spot analysis.
Not in the near to moderate future. Supply issues and politicization of real technical and social issues facing us all will require agenda neutral review of all of these processes.
The technology has come a long way, but I feel that we are five to 10 years from widespread acceptance and trust in the industry.
Oil analysis will never become outdated; the value obtained from the elemental analysis cannot be conducted with a sensor. However, to control contamination, a sensor will aid in being more preventive.
I don’t believe it will ever become outdated due to the fact that these sensors are not currently able to perform the thorough analysis that you receive from a lab.
Never. Look at all the lower tier oils on the market today!
I don’t believe it will become outdated.
Oil monitoring will go on for quite some time as many companies do not use online sensors due to various reasons.
It will not. It is economically impossible to monitor every single equipment.
Some tests may remain challenging for sensors. But I see more and more analysis can be replaced by IoT solutions.
Never, but will be reduced significantly. Online sensors are great, but when something strange is seen, further analysis is required.
When the process is critical, or when the operational context or the shape of machine is difficult for human inspection, it can be dangerous.
I don’t think it will ever become totally outdated.
I think you meant “inline” or “onboard” sensors. Oil sampling and analysis becomes outdated when the onboard sensors and interpretation of the data provides better value at lower cost than the legacy methods. Value may be different for different users but would be some combination of timeliness, accuracy and ease.
Once the sensors become reliable and cost effective.
Has the lag time of mailing a sample and lab processing time had a negative impact on your equipment or production?
Yes
42%
No
58%
Based on an informal poll sent to 15,000 TLT readers.
I don’t think it will be outdated any time soon. Real-time oil sensors are great, to a certain extent. However, there is still a lot of data that we can analyze in a used oil analysis report that oil sensor technology does not give us yet. This information is still critical for determining oil health, especially if oil drain intervals are being extended.
Laboratory oil analysis will not become outdated, as the data provided by online sensors will still need to be checked and verified periodically.
I believe that manual oil analysis will inevitably be a part of some systems that contain lubricants. Sensors are not foolproof and are susceptible to error or failure. Also, there may be a benefit to a stored sample for analysis of a component not normally analyzed by a sensor (as of yet).
Never. You will always need to check if online sensor’s readings are OK.
It seems to me that there will always be some machinery where installation of online sensors won’t be practical based on both cost and accessibility.
When no benchmark substances are available (for example, when using a new oil formulation). Also after modernization of the oil flow line (e.g., by introducing various control reducers).
It does not. Condition monitoring requires skilled people, and sensors are used more on the reactive maintenance of things. There are a lot of important tests that can only be performed through laboratory testing and sampling.
Both lab and online oil condition monitoring at this stage complement each other well, so my guess is this will not happen for at least 20 years, and maybe only start when the real-time technology shifts from being indicative to very accurate and also offers a wide range of parameters that can be monitored.
It will always have a place in the industry, just may not be as prevalent. It also is needed to verify online sensors for accuracy.
It will never become outdated as one can always use it as a supplemental test to aid in the oil monitoring exercise.
Never.
Would you consider replacing traditional oil analysis with oil condition monitoring?
Yes
47%
No
53%
Based on an informal poll sent to 15,000 TLT readers.
Inline condition monitoring is oil analysis. The condition monitoring is based on a failure signal, which gives an alarm on a certain level. Oil analysis should be used in the proactive domain when trends can be visible without reaching a failure signal.
Never. We will always need oil analysis for special applications.
Oil analysis cannot be outdated if its processing is well prepared and organized. Oil condition monitoring cannot replace oil analysis because oil analysis can include many additional oil analysis methods that cannot be approached by the condition monitoring.
Never. It’s also necessary as a reference or as verification media.
Q.2 Would you prefer that new equipment be set up for proper oil sampling and/or condition monitoring, or would you prefer to retrofit, and why?
New equipment should always be set up for oil condition monitoring.
Set up for oil sampling as a way of checks and balances.
Both are important.
Better from new, but many machines would benefit from retrofit.
New equipment if the value invested is comparable to the value received.
Having things set up from the factory reduces a step for the end-user to add later. The equipment being set up new also prevents the excuse of not having time to get around to setting it up and increases the likelihood of oil analysis being performed. On the downside, if the machine comes set up, you lose some of the ability to tailor to your facility’s needs and current processes.
What worked for us today will not necessarily work for us tomorrow. We need to embrace change.
I prefer it to be done by the OEM since retrofitting can be difficult due to a variety of reasons, such as management of change requests can be difficult or complex; access points are non-existent, minimal or sub-optimal; and some modifications may void warranties.
I prefer all equipment to be set up for proper oil sampling. Once old retrofitted equipment is taken out of service and new equipment is put in place, it needs to already be set up for proper oil sampling.
Set up from the OEM for proper placement.
If there were to be a full scale set up of oil condition monitoring in the industry, all equipment and processes would be required to have monitoring set up, and all older equipment would require retrofitting. Also, lubricant providers would need to quit offering oil sampling to clients. That would be a big stretch in the industry. It would have to go along with an economy of scale.
I would prefer all new equipment be set up for proper oil sampling and/or condition monitoring.
Retrofit. With the current development in sensors and IoT solutions, it is very easy to retrofit in most cases.
New equipment—it should be standard!
For me it depends on the type of equipment and how it is orientated. If it is equipment that can only be installed in one position, being setup already would be good. If it is a gearbox that has several mounting positions, I would rather retrofit.
Are you concerned about the possibility of industrial espionage or hacking of online oil condition monitoring equipment?
Yes
33%
No
67%
Based on an informal poll sent to 15,000 TLT readers.
A well thought out, integrated and reliable oil sampling or condition arrangement beats a cobbled retrofit every time.
New equipment should be factory fitted with sampling ports, and older equipment should be retrofitted as required.
I think all new equipment should be set up with proper sample points and have the option for oil sensor technology when purchasing it. If OEMs are not offering this, they will be considered lacking in technology and may fall behind their competitors.
New equipment should be set up for both online condition monitoring and proper oil sampling from the start. Users should work with OEMs to be sure the sensors and sample ports are placed properly to get representative and useful information.
Retrofit where possible—expense should be less.
Retrofit has the benefit of a local supplier providing in-service support, whereas OEMs usually make certain components tamper-proof or proprietary.
Both should be working—online condition monitors (50%) and traditional oil analysis (50%). A combination will be the best solution.
No brainer! If it’s available, have the vendor install the monitoring devices before you accept the machine.
I prefer that new equipment be set up for proper oil sampling and/or condition monitoring.
I will take a call based on the purpose of the new equipment. If it is very critical, I would go for online with an option for oil sampling.
Set up from factory is preferred if done right.
With improvements in equipment, newer is better. Retrofitting is more cost effective in the short run, but in the long run, it is not.
The preferred is always when new equipment is set up. However, understanding of OEM on the importance of this is not up to scratch. The practical understanding that somebody has about something on a machine and what the issues are is limited.
Are you currently using oil condition monitoring equipment?
Yes
51%
No
49%
Based on an informal poll sent to 15,000 TLT readers.
Yes, however, it depends on the results we can get with new equipment and its cost.
The best is to fit on new equipment if the customer makes use of its output and regards it as valuable. Otherwise, make it possible for retrofit if customers see it more as nice to have.
I prefer the new equipment to be OEM set up because they know exactly where is the safest and most representative place to install it.