Uptime

Tap Into Infrared

Successful Programs Can Be Outsourced or Run In-House
by Jeffrey L. Gadd

Infrared thermography is emphatically embraced by those who have realized the benefits.  Equally, infrared is dismissed by those who aren’t quite sure what it is or whether it has value.  “I’ve been here twenty years and we never needed infrared” are words on the lips of more than one old salt.  Well, things change, and this is an exciting time for those of us who are involved in the IR technology.  When evaluating this technology for your operation there are two methods to consider, specifically; should you develop an in-house program or outsource the work? Training and experience of the thermographer and the quality of the infrared (IR) camera used on the job are both a critical part of the equation. Figuring out which camera is the best value can be tricky, so proper research on the subject and some due-diligence are required for you to be able to “tap into infrared”.

In-House vs. Outsourced

This is simple: unplanned downtime = lost money.  For companies with critical operations, 24/7 manufacturing and a proactive mindset, an in-house program makes good business sense.  Many companies have successfully implemented in-house programs; for example, 2006 Uptime PdM Program of the Year Infrared winners Johns Manville in Kansas, and 2007 Infrared winners Aerospace Testing Alliance (ATA) at Arnold Air Force Base in Tennessee, to name a couple.  These are examples of world class in-house P/PM programs.  Many companies must outsource this type of work as it is not economically feasible to have an in-house program.  The biggest benefit to outsourcing is that there is no long term commitment and the costs are generally lower –but so are the returns on investment.  Not having an on-site IR camera system makes troubleshooting using IR impossible.

Training and Education (In-House)

Training is a critical step if you have an in-house program or are planning to start one. In the case of electrical infrared inspections, a person with an electrical background is the ideal person to train on infrared if they have the right personality.  Someone that is timid is not a good candidate.  While performing electrical inspections, there are a lot of considerations.  Safety is the first, but you also need a person who understands the equipment, i.e., switchgear, buss ducts, fuse clips, control transformers, etc., so that they can identify what they are looking at.

Next, never make the thermographer responsible for the repairs when he or she finds problems, even if they are capable of accomplishing, them because it is not efficient.  Infrared thermography has not quite progressed into a science, so it is still somewhat of an art form. This leads to wild variances in the number of reportable findings.  Training and mentoring by an experienced thermographer is key.  There are other personality factors to consider.  Some people will over-report even if this creates more work for them.  Others will not report all the problems because they don’t want to repair them, or they think maybe it will be OK until the next scan or the classic “I’m quitting soon, so I don’t really care” attitude.

Training and Experience (Outsourced)

Training and experience of the thermographer are the two factors that should drive the purchase of any service.  A technician from a professional infrared service company has most likely [but not certainly] had some sort of formal training and on the job training.   However, the more important component is to find someone with a considerable amount of experience.  No one wants an untrained thermographer with a low-resolution IR camera learning how to do electrical infrared surveys at their facility.  You must qualify the contractor by inquiring as to what type of training they have had, what references they have and what experience they have accumulated.

Many companies that we have dealt with in the past (even ones that have eventually hired us), at first, judge the company solely by the cost of my service –which is not the right way to buy any service, and certainly not infrared services.  Recently a company brought me in for what seemed to be an “interview” and plant tour.  Both the maintenance manager and plant manager had prepared questions to find out what we could and could not do.  It was refreshing to see people take a genuine interest in evaluating my skills, my company’s capabilities and the cost of the services.  This is one of few companies in recent years that have taken the time to find out what they are really paying for.

Evaluating samples of past IR projects by the thermographer is important and effective.  When someone prepares a sample project, they will naturally use some of their more impressive imagery.  If the thermographer shows you images that look like the ones on the left in either Figure 1 or Figure 2, it should let you know that you definitely do not want to hire them since you are probably looking at their “best” work.

Infrared Cameras (In-House and Outsourced)

To effectively contract IR services, one needs to evaluate not only the thermographer’s capabilities, but also the equipment specified.  The specification should be based on performance and not brand-specific.  In other words, the specification should not read: “the IR camera used shall be a Brand-X, Model-Y”.  Instead the spec should be about the technical characteristics of the camera, such as the minimum spatial resolution and the minimum thermal sensitivity.

Other considerations when specifying IR cameras are:

  •  Proprietary infrared software compatibility and usability 
  •  Lens options (telephoto, wide-angle)
  •  Built-in visual camera
  •  Built-in voice recording & data-logging
  •  Built-in laser pointer
  •  Extra (and standard!) batteries
  •  Adaptability to infrared windows (to increase safety and lower PPE requirements)

Once you have narrowed down your selection of cameras to a couple, ask for demonstrations of the units and the software for each.  Bear in mind that the newest trend on the lower end cameras is for the manufacturers to sell through distributors instead of reps.  Distributors don’t have the margins to sell by demonstration, so they will resist.  Now, if you want a demo of a $35K camera, I promise a representative will make time for you.

Conclusions

When evaluating what infrared technology can do for your operation, there are many considerations.  In-house programs can be very successful, but are highly prone to failure if you select the wrong personnel and if the program is not given full support by management.  If you outsource your infrared services, set up an “interview” with the contractors and have lots of questions ready.  At the end of the interview, you should know if this contractor will not meet, meet or probably exceed your expectations.  When specifying an IR camera purchase, consider hiring a thermographer who knows the IR market to be your consultant.  Many cameras have features that are not necessary and overpriced.  Do your homework each step of the way and you will see positive results and a positive impact to your company’s bottom line.

Jeffrey L. Gadd is the owner of Vision Infrared Services (www.visioninfrared.com) in Cleveland, OH. He is a Level II Infrared Thermographer and has an AAS in Industrial Electricity along with 12 years experience as a electrician and maintenance technician. You can contact Jeff with questions at 440-554-3620 or e-mail to: jeff@visioninfrared.com

Tap Into Infrared.pdf

Lessons Learned Implementing an Infrared Program

by Jennifer Daugherty and Roger Miller

Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC), at Arnold Air Force Base, Tennessee, has focused efforts toward an improved infrared (IR) program. As equipment ages, the need for improving inspections and making work more effective becomes imperative. Infrared inspection of equipment allows equipment health to be determined and tear-down intervals to be driven more by condition at optimum frequencies. This paper discusses lessons learned while implementing an infrared program and passes those lessons on to others that may find it useful. The goal of the IR program is to increase availability and improve equipment health by detecting impending failures.

Arnold Engineering Development Center is the largest ground flight simulation test complex in the world. AEDC is the world’s premier flight simulation test facility, conducting performance tests in aerodynamics, aeropropulsion, hypersonics, rockets, space systems, and technology. AEDC’s mission is to test and evaluate aircraft, missile, and space systems and components at simulated flight conditions. Twenty-seven of AEDC’s test units have capabilities unmatched elsewhere in the United States; fourteen are unique in the world. Facilities can simulate flight conditions from sea level up to 300 miles and from subsonic velocities to Mach 20. AEDC has motors up to 83,000 horsepower and pumps up to 50,000 gallons per minute and compressors with flow rates in excess of 1,000,000 cubic feet per minute. Protecting the equipment to increase availability is imperative. The Aerospace Testing Alliance (ATA) is the operations, maintenance, information management, and support contractor to the Air Force at AEDC.

AEDC has performed Predictive Maintenance (PdM) and Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) for over 20 years. The IR program had been a fragmented program and had experienced trouble overcoming the scheduling and safety issues involved with high-voltage electrical equipment, but to improve equipment health assessment and reduce the cost to maintain equipment, AEDC continues to improve the infrared program that assesses electrical and mechanical equipment. The purpose of this paper is to share some elements of our IR program that may have been originally neglected but have since been determined to be crucial for continued IR program growth and effectiveness. The specific elements this paper covers are the plan, program quality control, safety, and justification.

IR Implementation Plan

One of the most effective ways to improve an IR program is by developing a good implementation plan with the right elements and actually using it. The plan must be solid enough to be used for the growth of the program, and time should be put into developing the plan because it should ultimately include the scope of your program and the map to get there. Many programs have been successfully started without good plans; however, few programs are sustained and grown to their true potential without a solid detailed plan. Certain elements should be included in the plan to ensure that it will give the direction and foundation needed as the program continues to grow.

Every plan must include the program’s mission, vision, and goals. Ensure the goals are tied to the company’s mission. Each goal should support the company’s goals in some way. This is important in showing management that the IR program is in agreement with the company’s goals. It is also helpful to gain an understanding of what the real goals of the IR program should be. Many times goals may not be what originally seemed to be intuitive. Establishing and directing the program toward these goals are paramount.

Once the goals have been established, metrics must be developed to gauge the performance of the IR program. The metrics chosen should be related to your internal and external goals thereby relating them to your type of business. In some enterprises, ROI may be most critical while availability may be more important for others. That is because equipment availability is directly associated with the test length of an aerospace R&D program. One of our goals is to shorten the time required to test at AEDC thus shortening the R&D phase of critical aircraft development. If ROI is chosen ensure to be consistent with assumptions and lean toward the conservative side to improve program credibility. However, don’t be so conservative that the program is undersold.

Another part of the plan should state how quickly you plan to mature the program, including the funding scenarios expected in the future. This will help provide structure for the program and give the company the necessary time to allocate funding. Documenting the maturation plan will build additional credibility and support. The plan will demonstrate that forethought was used in developing the program and that the goals.

Quality Issues

Another very critical part of a good IR program is to ensure that your program appears professional by addressing any quality issues. One of the most obvious ways to ensure high quality for the program is to become procedural based. Procedures document and provide a roadmap for the way data will be collected and analyzed. They help to ensure that IR data is collected consistently and accurately. Procedures should address any equipment calibration issues as well. Procedures give much more control for managing an IR program.

Another way to help ensure that the data collected is accurate is to develop a good qualification program, which should also be included in the plan. It should include expected certifications, training, critical procedures testing required for the job and at least one field evaluation of the technician collecting data. A qualification test may include questions associated with equipment failure identification, knowledge of the IR equipment being used, IR pattern problems, and IR calibration issues. Qualification time periods should dictate a specific time period and qualification records should be maintained. Any qualification and currency issues should be documented and followed. If a technician is removed from IR duties for a period of time they may need to be re-qualified; this could mean simply taking a test or starting the qualification process over.

Consistent data analysis and reporting is another important consideration. Consistent alarming rules should always be used. When the program is in its infancy, use rules that are available from other sources. When issuing reports refer to these sources and ensure the recommendations are based on those rules. Be consistent when reporting findings. Use the rules to identify when a problem exists. Ultimately however, the IR program’s structure should be based on tools e.g. reliability centered maintenance, root cause analysis, and failure modes and effects analysis. Once problems have been identified document the findings and report them using a consistent reporting method. AEDC uses standard database to both document and report findings in a predetermined reporting format.

Understanding both IR and plant equipment builds credibility and accuracy to the program. Both the technician and the analyst should understand the IR equipment being used. The technician should have a good understanding of the effects of emissivity, reflectivity, FOV, effects of surrounding conditions, etc. Without a good understanding, misleading images could lead to a misdiagnosis of equipment. Not only are good IR images essential but the analyst should also understand the plant equipment that is being surveyed. For example, electricians and electrical engineers usually make good electrical equipment surveyors because they understand how breakers, connections, motors, and transformers work.

Safety

Critical to any PdM program is the safety practices. Safety should be considered in all aspects of the IR program. Minimizing technician exposure to hazardous equipment is not just a responsibility but an obligation for the people who work in your program. Putting a technician in unnecessary risks should not be an acceptable part of your program. At AEDC, NFPA 70E compliance is mandatory. Imaging equipment with a high energy rating could no longer be accomplished until IR windows were installed to allow safe access to technicians. The use of windows and mirrors not only improved technician safety but also improved the consistency of data and productivity by greatly shorting the amount of time the technicians are exposed to a hazardous environment. Understanding the potential hazards of electrical equipment is vitally important. Many times the highest voltage equipment may not be the most dangerous. Experienced personnel should calculate arc flash energy levels to determine where potential hazards may be hiding.

Justification

Justification will always be required for the entire life of an IR program. Always be prepared to provide proof that the IR program is working and that company goals are easier to attain using IR technology. It is better to voluntarily provide periodic proof that your program is working than to wait until asked to do so. In some cases, it could be too late to put together your program’s justification after being asked to do so. Decisions may have already been made that could adversely affect the IR program after it is too late to react. Program justification can also be aided by having one or two very simple demonstrations to demonstrate how IR technology works and help the company achieve its goals. Also periodically take a couple of your successful findings and put them on a slide for your management. These will also be useful for management to show to stakeholders. This will help to make management more supportive of the program and will boost support. This can also prove to be very beneficial in those times that extra funds become available. Remember that you are all on the same team and making your management look good usually translates into further funding and support.

Conclusion

In closing, a good IR program includes not just one element but many: a thorough plan, good metrics, control of the quality of your program, smart thinking, working safely, and continuous program justification and self monitoring. Just as important however, is that ability to work well with technicians and management. Strive to build program credibility, management support, and build on the IR program’s strengths. Through continuous improvement and never being satisfied with where the program is currently, a strong IR program can be very beneficial to a company. Many more elements are required than simply understanding IR technology to sustain and improve the program to the next level.

Note: ATA/Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC), at Arnold Air Force Base, Tennessee were awarded Uptime Magazine Best Infrared Program in 2007 and Best Overall Predictive Maintenance Program in 2008 

The Rise of Air Barriers in Construction

by Lee Durston
Uptime June/July 2008

Architects, contractors, engineers and building owner-developers are beginning to see a new push to include air barriers into their structures. This trend has brought about numerous questions and very little in the way of answers. For one, the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and several state energy codes— Massachusetts,Wisconsin and Michigan , with more expected to follow—now require the use of air barriers.  More importantly, energy efficiency and occupant comfort—two key ingredients of sustainable design—are driving the use of air barriers across market sectors.

What an air barrier actually is and does is not always well understood by many professionals – it is not a vapor barrier…at least not in all cases. Needless to say, air barrier systems’ performance in the exterior walls, foundation/floors and roof systems are getting much more attention in the construction of high performance buildings.

In fact, air-barrier systems in nonresidential buildings are estimated to reduce air leakage by up to 83 percent, save on gas bills by more than 40 percent and cut down on electrical consumption in excess of 25 percent, according to simulations by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of typical buildings without air barriers.

Although the results of this particular NIST study have not been field tested, the results are compelling. Manufacturers and groups such as the Building Enclosure Council (BEC) have publicly confirmed the importance of air barriers to meeting energy benchmarks and to building performance and sustainability in general. Without an effective, continuous air-barrier system, conditioned air tends to escape through the building envelope, and the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) system has to work harder to keep the indoor environment comfortable.

And, as the NIST report demonstrated, harder-working HVAC means higher energy bills. In fact, the statistics from NIST and other academic and professional research groups have not only caught the attention of certain entities—such as the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and code officials in Massachusetts, Michigan and Wisconsin—but they have led to new awareness of the fact that air barriers also can increase both the longevity and durability of the building envelope. Considering that walls and roofs account for approximately 25 percent of total building construction costs, bolstering the building envelope’s quality makes a lot of sense both from a life cycle cost analysis stance and building health stance.

To ensure that air-barrier materials meet the needs of rigorous demands, specifiers and building teams can refer to laboratory testing for meeting such standards as ASTM E-2357-05, which tests air-barrier assemblies for air leakage and ASTM 2178-03, which tests for air leakage of materials. But this alone does not guarantee that the materials will be constructed to bring about an air-tight structure. A new form of testing has developed for commercial structures and has been incorporated in residential applications for some years now. Real-world metrics testing incorporating pressurization systems (industrial blower-doors) and infrared thermal imaging allows for a rate leakage test (fan) for the building envelope, and a locate test (infrared) to find voids in the air barrier assembly.

In an effort to provide for the construction of a continuous air barrier in new construction or to test existing buildings for air-tightness and provide remedial recommendations where necessary, a host of services are now available, including:

• Design and pre-construction observation during construction, pre-test visits, air-tightness testing, air leakage investigation and advice on effective remedial works should the building fail to achieve the required standard.

Peer review of the proposed construction methods and materials can be undertaken by analyzing drawings and specifications and providing feedback where warranted.

• Site visits to observe construction quality and detailing to confirm that an effective airtight barrier is being provided.

Air-tightness tests are preceded by the issuing of a pre-test inspection list. Alternatively, a separate pre-test walk-thru can be made to ensure the test itself is carried out quickly with a minimum of disruption.

• Air-tightness testing, providing pressurization equipment ranging from modular single door fans for testing small buildings and rooms within buildings (Figure 1), to large multiple fan systems for testing larger buildings (Figure 2) in accordance with ASTM’s E 779 (2003) and E-1827-96 (2002). All tests can normally be carried out in one day, with the building pressurization lasting around one hour. A pass or fail can generally be confirmed while on site, and a full written report issued within 5 working days of completing the test.

• Air leakage investigation and remedial works in case the building fails to achieve the required air-tightness standard (see Figures 3,4 and 5). Further investigation can be undertaken while on site to pin point the causes of the failure using infrared imaging, envelope testing in accordance with ISO 6781:1983 and ASTM C1060-90(1997), and smoke testing methods. Remedial works can then be agreed upon to bring the building envelope up to the necessary standard prior to carrying out a retest. In the end, buildings can be tested to verify performance levels based on codes, or requirements. Additionally, testing can be performed to achieve additional LEED credits through innovation points.

Although energy costs have been the final factor to the requirement of air barriers, in my opinion, it is move in the right direction. Air leakage through the building envelope can lead to unnecessary heat loss in winter or heat gain in summer, condensation and moisture damage in hidden cavities, rain penetration, poor indoor temperature and humidity control, and excessive energy consumption. As awareness increases, the air barrier will be specified more and more and retro-active air-tightness measures on existing buildings will become the norm.

Don’t wait for the codes to require it, do the smart thing now.

Lee Durston is the Director of Building Sciences at BCRA in Tacoma, WA