6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6

Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Misalignment Diagnosis, Vibration Response & Resulting Spectral Patterns

by François (Frank) Gagnon.
© Copyright 2016 by François Gagnon. All Rights Reserved.

ABSTRACT / There is nothing new in stating that misalignment and imbalance remain the two most
common causes of machinery vibration and problematic amplitudes, from mild to severe, depending on
context. Analysts, especially beginners, often request a recipe to detect and diagnose misalignment
without fail. We have strong elements, in terms of waveform shape, spectral contents and phase
analysis, but the list of factors influencing machine and structure behavior is quite extensive, as this
paper will demonstrate. Literature on various vibration spectral patterns resulting from misalignment
abounds, but yields highly conflicting conclusions, for reasons we will explore, comment and review.

Key words: misalignment, parallel, angular, vibration response, FFT spectral contents, diagnosis.

Author’s Note: where units are converted for the reader’s convenience, assume the metric, rms or Hz
units are close approximations provided for convenience. Author bio on last page. DO read Appendices
and references sections.

Extensive documentation is available on the consequences of misalignment as 1X, 2X and/or 3X RPM

spectral peaks (1X and 2X are more common, but 2X clearly predominant in terms of how many times
we may come across it, as seen in Appendix 1), and references to phase analysis abound as support to
the misalignment diagnosis, nobody can say with complete certainty how a specific case of
misalignment will behave or “play out” without prior observation.

There are also considerations for impulses or impacting within the coupling when the misalignment
condition reaches from important to extreme severity, and we recognize this behavior as a harmonic
series visible in the FFT spectrum, but this series is the byproduct of inadequacies of the FFT to interpret
spike or impulse behavior within the time waveform measurement.

The question arises as to the reasons why, in spite of the by now enormous quantities of data amassed
through decades of Condition Monitoring and Vibration Analysis, we still do not have a comprehensive
reference book and full understanding of every relevant detail, causal relationships and resulting
waveforms and spectra. Waveform shaped like Ms or Ws may arise from sources other than
misalignment since all we require are a mix of 1X, 2X and/or 3X RPM to obtain similar “shapes”.

While we proceed to explore the reasons why, readers who wish to participate in detailing their findings
may send in their conclusions to the author fgagnon@vibra-k.com. Given enough examples, we will
assemble a booklet and the participants will receive evolving copies of same as material filters in. All
corporate references will be removed, but the contributors will receive credit for their input (unless you
prefer not to be mentioned). Data received will be commented with respect to units (metric, US, peak,
1

RMS) to facilitate comprehension. This also implies amplitude units should be visible (pk, rms, mm/s,
Page

ips), to avoid dimensionless consideration.

 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Ideally, this effort would include:

- a machine picture, and machine details (type, function, motor HP or kW, RPM, or RPM range for VFDs,
coupling type, any other)
- data on all 3 axes (time waveform and FFT spectra, or DFT), unless of no pertinence
- confirmed misalignment type and quantity / severity when data was collected (what was found)
- when MISdiagnosed, the reasons why (what was found to contribute to or emulate misalignment)

A Quick 5 Whys (to explain a continued lack of such a resource)

Why? The list of variants is too long, and nobody has done the groundwork, meaning the full data set is
not accessible in relation to machine-type, function, component type, prevailing conditions, and
resulting vibration waveforms and spectral patterns.
Why? Lack of budget, limited access to a wide variety of machines, limited awareness (of the problem or
issues, or of factors in play), failure to recognize the influence of such details, unavailability of adequate
measuring equipment, changes in technology, lack of training… Ex: (please correct the author if wrong
and even better, send a reference title) we don’t even have good samples of relative phase for 2X and
3X when misalignment is present. Obtaining those would have been relatively easy from complex
spectra, when performing cross-channel phase measurements, without having to do a full ODS
(Operating Deflection Shape) analysis and animation.
Why? While a relatively comprehensible and usable fuzzy-logic set of criteria exists, meaning that we
have a general understanding of resulting vibration behavior, we seem to accept no further need to
develop specifics for each potential variant. Thus, each case must be analyzed or treated individually.
Why? Nobody committed the funds and resources to delve on the matter and reach appropriate
conclusions or quantification, meaning a comprehensive rule-base for case assessment and diagnosis or
analytics. Also, few people have the opportunity to work on a wide variety of machines or understand
the nuances, and unless an algorithm and heuristic are considered, there is no foreseeable commercial
benefit (aside from knowledge, and better / improved diagnoses).
Why? No money, and publication makes for some small, limited notoriety, but little payback for
completing the exercise. The knowledge, while usable, would thus only serve a single individual or a few
participating professionals. Whereas within proprietary software, some return and commercial
advantage would indeed be achieved, and prove beneficial.

Factors Affecting Misalignment-Caused Vibration Response

The obvious (or perhaps not so evident) comprehensive (as complete as the author could make it; feel
free to comment and add any missing item) list of influencing factors in play on misalignment response
include:
misalignment type (parallel, angular, combined), severity (may be quite divergent for one misalignment
type versus the other if both are present) , variable thermal growth on the vertical but also on the much
more disregarded horizontal, thermal cycling (may not put you back in your original starting position),
load effects (positional shift), coupling type & stiffness & mass & number of elements (jaws, grids, bolts,
shear pins, etc.), condition of elements, insert or spider type (design, material), lubrication condition
(dry, partial, saturated, grit, contamination), universal joint (sometimes seen on paper machines), spacer
2
Page

or presence of a jackshaft (intermediate shaft extension), skewed flanges, torque transmission error,
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

rotor imbalance and severity (an imbalance will sometimes introduce or partly behave as misalignment),
machine design (horizontal or vertical? Height, length, width, overhang or between bearings, rotor mass
and its distribution, structural stiffness of motor, of machine frame, of rotors, of coupling, isotropy
(meaning equal in all radial directions), comparative masses, function, shafts’ lengths, bearing type and
preload if any, lubrication type and film thickness, sheave eccentricity, pendulum or inverted pendulum
effects, open sections favoring distortion, etc.), rigid or flexible rotor, slender rotor,
attachments to driven machine (ducts, piping, residual stress, thermal stress, mass, stiffness, isolation or
lack thereof, such as collapsed flexible joints, etc.), expansion / contraction effects of pipes, ducts or
their supports, belt tightness,
base, floor, foundation stiffness, mass, pendulum or inverted pendulum, water table, level or plumb
issues, sprung or soft foot, shim stacks, shim size (relative to each other and relative to motor or
machine foot size), isolation springs or pads, inertial blocks, length& mass, single or dual bases, grout,
voids or cavities (in cement, grout or underlying floor, sometimes from erosion or chemical attack),
comparative position (building corners are stiffeners, when compared to middle of the plate floor), floor
stiffness, anchorages and attachments (bolts, etc.), bolt-bound, stripped bolts or lodgings / nuts,
damaged adjustments, lost or inadequate dowel pins, indoor/outdoor and seasonal changes, integrity or
state of any and all of the previous
geographical location (oddly enough, due to variants in design requirements: a design std rule-of-
thumb1 states a minimum of 3:2 to 2:1 for the inert mass to rotating mass relationship, but in seismic
prone areas, the rule is void, changing to 6:1 to 8:1), so, design imperatives with respect to rotating
versus inert mass ratio, and/or rotating mass to casing mass ratio, often a key factor for flexible rotors
such as steam turbines,
structural stiffness alterations (looseness, broken welds, loose anchorage, shorn anchorage, etc.),
mechanical power transmitted (3HP? 30? 100? 3,000?), transmission error, stability, presence of gears,
RPM, or RPMs, VFDs, reduction or overdrive (especially large reductions as introducing massive
mechanical power output),
component stiffness, distance between components, shaft overhangs, shaft bend, shaft kink,
component condition (such as wear, defects, damage, impacting, rubs, etc.),
nonlinearities and discontinuities,
rotating mass (inertial effects, possible gyroscopic effects, shifting radial reaction by 90 degrees, or in
extreme cases, for an inertia flywheel or similar rotor, autogyration)
resonant effects (amplification, but also an amount of phase shift, up to, but not necessarily as much as,
90 degrees, at a perfect resonance), other causes of vibration tied to design or problems,
eccentricity can influence phase, albeit not in the same fashion as (whole or partial) resonance,
critical speed effect (rotor bow, proximity to first or 2nd lateral modes),
bent shaft from idleness,
structure and/or load temperature (steam, for instance), rotor function load, and thermal bow,
torsional issues if any are present (misalignment can augment an otherwise benign torsional effect),
3
Page

1
Making exception of highly sophisticated rotor or machine designs, such as aeroderivative gas turbines, meaning
aircraft engines possibly used in industrial applications, or similar stringent requirements.
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

About Thermal Growth, Thermal Gradients & Dynamic / Load Reactions

There is an important nuance at work: the hot/cold alignment really only deals with thermal growth,
and what this writer calls dynamic misalignment should only consider reactions to dynamic load
SEPARATE from thermal expansion / cryogenic or cooling contraction. "Hot" holds unavoidable ties with
process flows and quasi static loads from piping and casing growth or contraction, while the machine is
still really hot, which is transient state at best once the power is shut off.

A few of the many course participants who heard this over the years do report beneficial results in
aiming for a compromise alignment when certain of the prevailing conditions or environments we
describe hereafter can shift the alignment over time.

In hazardous areas, where risks involve flammable or explosion, hot work permits would be required to
closely install a laser and target across a span, in parallel to a shaft, while the machine operates. The
specifics in terms of industrial facility environments vary, and the possibility may simply not exist in
certain environments, a decidedly limiting factor. Still, IF and WHEN the machine is critical and exposed
to load and thermal or seasonal variations, this approach may prove worthwhile.

In terms of mostly parallel alignment, if a laser is mounted (properly and safely) so as to measure off a
target mounted exactly in parallel to the shaft at the bearing center height, and preferably right next to
the guard, and the laser then zeroed, we will then enable quantification of dynamic-load effect. Ideally,
from 100% (or nominal / usual) load, and if at all possible, progressively unloading the motor / driven
machine tandem, and then turning off. The variations, plotted for load %, equal dynamic load reaction.
Some machines just get powered off with no such unloading ramp, but this method properly documents
the variations linked to load. No need to mention the importance of stability for any such temporary
assembly: care is needed so the results must remain valid as the machine coasts down, possibly crossing
some rotor critical speed or structural resonance and thus shaking the laser. Relative motion is possible
from laser to target, and if a resonant amplification is perceived, it should be noted.

Once those positional changes are measured / quantified, immediately zero again, and shrinkage (or
growth for cryogenic or cold applications) then takes over to further move the machine components.
Thus, only if & when possible / feasible, the difference between dynamic reaction and thermal variations
can be established and offsets implemented accordingly.

Consider the cases where the machine is either located outdoors, or its suction or discharge piping
extend outside. Since realigning will hardly be doable twice a year, the "not so ideal but pragmatic"
target will be in Spring / Fall, with extremes in Winter / Summer. Not so dramatic in the Caribbean, but
clearly a consideration if ambient delta T is significant / huge (from -30oF to 90oF, meaning -30oC to 30oC
or similar). So, we face the inevitability of hopefully reasonably mitigated unavoidable misalignment.

Not a typical approach, and diverges from ideal mounting practice. But it can serve us in extreme cases.
Not always feasible due to access, and also possibly limited by alignment-device brand & model.
4
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

For critical machines, so exposed to seasonal temperature fluctuations, if steps are not taken to aim for
the middle ground, one of the seasonal extremes may yield much higher and possibly damaging or even
destructive vibration amplitudes. Triggering machine protection warnings or alarms has been seen,
though not machine shutdown / trip.

Seen for air-separation plants in northern climes: long-term overall amplitude trends resemble a sine
wave. The sine amplitude, from a lower threshold amplitude to a higher one, over LONG time may be
sharper or flatter depending on the scope of the temperature gradient. This may be linked in part to
alignment variations for some machines. On air compressors, colder air aspiration also means a portion
of the liquefaction work has been done for you. From the previous, we can also assert that trending
upwards does not always mean deteriorating machine health, but may simply be tied to prevailing
operational parameters. Elsewhere, a large nitrogen compressor had alarms in spring and late fall, as the
ground thawed or froze.

Another apparently absurd consideration, but of some import when high-precision is absolutely
required: sun exposure. In one application, feed sealing for a rotary kiln required extremely tight
tolerances. Sunlight exposure of the jacket (kiln outer skin) had to be considered. Facetiously, white
paint or covers do much to eliminate such considerations for pipes and the like, but would just peel off a
kiln. More seriously, where sunlight exposure does occur, dark colors (dark brown, black) for an
elongated component may introduce a variant.

To conclude this small section, such methods have been used successfully to partially resolve a handful
of difficult cases. Partially, since some misalignment may be deemed incurable.

Field Consideration / Machine Start or Restart & Alignment

A machine (usually) starts COLD (at ambient temperature, unless it was only turned off for a very short
time period), and proper offset should have been implemented to take thermal growth into account.
Upon reaching nominal RPM, initial measurements’ vibration amplitudes should be rougher, and ease as
the machine warms up and temperature stabilizes. Starting smooth and finishing rough shows a
problem (no offset). Starting rough and improving up to a still undesirable amplitude plateau might
indicate not enough compensation. And then, starting rough, followed by easing and THEN seeing
amplitudes move back up in value (likely overshooting with too much offset compensation?).

Imbalance Extremes
As analysts, we often think in terms of acceleration or velocity, and displacement takes a backseat
unless low-frequency applications are considered or proximity probes are involved in turbomachinery’s
sleeve bearings. We might remind ourselves that the displacement from a severe imbalance acts as a
form of or contributor to dynamic misalignment. The net impact of such a rotating force will be tied to
the stiffness of the machine structure as well as to the actual location of the imbalance: away from the
coupling end may only mean a short “attempted” travel of the shaft end.

Different amplitude parameters or units skew our data or our perception of same. When considering the
5
Page

possibility of imbalance contributions to misalignment, peak-peak displacement units should be

 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

remembered, as well as the frequency under consideration. A 3.2 Mils p-p displacement (80microns p-p)
for a 3580 RPM 1X (appr. 60Hz) is equivalent to 0.6 ips pk (10mm/s rms). Those 3.2 Mils become 0.3 ips
pk (or 5mm/s rms) for 1780 RPM (appr. 30Hz). For 0.3 inch/sec pk at 880 RPM (appr. 15Hz), the
displacement becomes 6.4 Mil p-p (160microns p-p). In that last case, the unbalanced rotor’s shaft will
try to pull itself out of line by 3.2 thousandths (of an inch), and half a turn later, by that same 3.2 Mils to
the other side. Will this result in an artificial instance of momentary misalignment? It might. All those
factors we listed earlier may determine if this will be the case or not. See Appendix 2 for a brief
exploration of moving the imbalance vector along a machine train.

Having prior knowledge of the expected misalignment limit or tolerance for a shaft can provide some
notion of how important any such displacement effect might become in terms of rotor behavior.

From Dec 2002 Maintenance Technology

A decent reference, but not entirely in

agreement with the Ludeca tolerance
chart (below).

0.001”= 25,4 microns or 0,0254 mm

This author always felt the use of RMS displacement values was especially convoluted, and establishing
correlates with alignment is a glaring example.

6
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Working Machines vs. Test Rotors & Test Lab

Reading various papers on the topics of misalignment and vibration response, spectral contents and the
like, we need to maintain a discerning mindset as authors may unintentionally lead us astray, even if
only with a paper title where the plural “rotors” is used in lieu of “a rotor” or “a rotor model”. The
catalog of factors of influence included in this paper should make it amply clear that experimental work
on a specific rotor or mathematical model and whatever conclusions may be derived from same are
usually ONLY and strictly applicable to that very same rotor, as opposed to being descriptive or
pertinent to the behavior of all rotors.

Trusting in a few laboratory test rotors fails to deliver GENERAL dominant rules for parallel and angular
misalignment, or increasing or exaggerated amounts of one, the other or both. The effort yields specific
rules for a given rotor. A test rotor2 is NOT (or rarely is) a machine. In most laboratory scenarios, the
rotor is designed to 1) turn, at fixed or variable RPM, and 2) vibrate or not, according to imbalance and
introduced misalignment. A machine, by definition, performs a task or function to accomplish a set goal.
This involves considerably higher motor power (and commensurate energy consumption). Limited
budgets are in part responsible for the use of limited power. And in most cases, due to the very absence
of a machine function, the transmitted mechanical power poorly reflects a real machine’s behavior.

Such statements do not invalidate rotor lab experiments. The data and conclusions derived from
experimentation remains extremely useful to expand our comprehension, but, a caveat serves us well
to prevent the generalized application or expectation to all rotors. Also, many tests are executed with
the introduction of measured or quantified imbalance, but such imbalance is applied to a thin-disk
located between bearings. The possible incidence of couple-imbalance disappears, and the frequent
placement of the disk between supporting bearings, as opposed to at or near the coupling, also alters
responses compared to what might be observed in the field or plant-floor.

Slight oddity, but one that requires our attention, most experiments involving angular misalignment, or
the angular portion of combined misalignment, seem to always rely on the angularity being on the
vertical. We regularly mention horizontal or vertical parallel offset, but we also seem to instantly assume
that angularity will be tied to cases of vertical “slant”. We have little comparing HV reactions for V
angular to HV reactions for H angular, or any differences for axial response to either H or V angular.

There are certainly machine and/or base designs propitious to horizontal angularity, and given the usual
differences between structural horizontal and vertical stiffness, the end-result response or behavior
might diverge from our expectations. Angular misalignment can be introduced with ease on the vertical,
and readily quantified, whereas doing so in the horizontal, or simultaneously on both axes, requires a lot
of work and is rife with the prospect of error. In the field, a pump’s suction or discharge may well be
horizontal, and the cause for the motor-to-pump angularity may be exaggerated stress from that pipe.
Under undue stress, bases or other components may swivel, twist or otherwise get misshapen.

On a demo rotor, the inert mass MAY fit the rule-of-thumb, but the stiffness ratio (machine to base,
base to "foundation", meaning a table) are not representative of plant-floor machinery reality, and the
7
Page

2
Technical nuance, “rotor” refers to the “rotary part of a machine”, and is not a machine itself
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

demo rotor base is often laid on top of a table, or attached to same with clamps. “Real world” masses in
play become entirely different due to floor anchors, inertia blocks, steel and cement structures.

Some rotor supports use frames or pedestals for bearing locations, and those will be especially weak in
the axial direction, favoring a sharper or more severe axial response. Longer rotors also mean a much
higher probability of stiffness discrepancies along the machine train.

The most common industry workhorse is the 100 HP (75kW), 4-pole asynchronous motor. Nowadays, it
may or may not be fitted with a VFD control. There is a considerably larger park of smaller motors, but
spread between 1, 5, 10, 30, 50 or 75HP (this last, 50kW), and a smaller random population of large
motors, that could be 400HP (300kW) or 5,000 (3,750kW). Largest asynchronous motor seen: 13KHP.
Not to be confused with synchronous motors. For that last type, largest seen: 40,000 HP (30 MW).
Apparently ABB makes motors to 80,000HP (60MW), but this consultant has neither come across nor
dealt with that specific model.

This portrait of the motor population by HP (or kW) does have a direct tie-in to Condition Monitoring.
PdM is most financially rewarding where continuous processes are involved, meaning chemical, paper,
metals and oil (refining or petrochemical). Power generation is excluded from motors, because its large
machines are of a different type. For misalignment concerns, though, those large machines will be
extremely important. As would the mostly sleeve bearing assets such as steam turbines, compressors
and others found in the other industrial sectors. From the US DoE’s United States Industrial Electric
Motor Systems Market Opportunities Assessment, the following tables show motor population
distribution by size (or power), and by energy-consumption. The document is either 1998 or 2002, but
little or no variation or departure from those percentages would have been expected between that
study and the present, save perhaps a high proliferation of VFDs. Also, that same source states that 42%
of motors drive pumps, the most common industrial machine, and some 19% drive fans.

8
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Conclusions (from literature; see Appendix 1 and References)

From our literature and textbooks, we know and generally accept that misalignment will:
- typically generate a mix of 1X, and/or 2X and/or 3X RPM in our FFT spectra,
- “mix” in the previous statement means “any permutation thereof”
- the exact response or behavior will depend on a long list of factors, including the type and severity of
misalignment
- more severe amplitudes will appear from sharper misalignment, but the relationship is typically non-
linear and said relationship will depend on the various factors already listed, although it is possible to
observe proportionality in some cases, or to see linearity over a limited range of misalignment severity
- from the previous, due to a frequent lack of proportionality between misalignment severity and
vibration amplitudes, quantifying the misalignment or its severity remains challenging in a significant
percentage of cases
- misalignment extremes (or for that matter, any other cause of extreme amplitudes, reactions or
dynamic loads) may show behavior quite different from that of a more reasonable severity
- the behavior from misalignment acting on an unbalanced rotor differs from that of misalignment acting
alone Reference [11] partly covers those variants. Also see Appendix 2 on same topic.
- as a generic statement, most looseness acts in the vertical, but vertical predominance can also mean a
sharp vertical offset misalignment
- other frequencies may appear, namely a) # of components within the coupling, and harmonics of
same, b) multiple harmonics of 1X if sharp reactions occur due to severe misalignment, such as springing
back or even impulses, c) evidence of rubbing or friction, characterized by 0.5X3 and/or 1.5X, but those
are scarcer and typically tied to certain specific machine configurations or coupling types, and d) a
subharmonic or subharmonic series linked to rubbing, mostly seen for elastomeric coupling inserts.
- Phase analysis is deemed useful in confirming the misalignment diagnosis. Reference [4] demonstrates
this at length. This writer would call phase analysis essential in this context. Accessibility or execution
challenges of the past have mostly disappeared with the advent and wide availability of cross-channel
phase. The 180o (and margin for error) out-of-phase behavior is a strong support to our diagnosis.
- Given the presence of several forcing frequencies (Ff), or the wide-band excitation effect of impulses,
we can expect one or more natural frequencies (Fn) of the structure or one of its components to show
mild (or greater) resonant amplification. This reaction occurs anywhere (depending on Fn locations). It
may add amplitude at or near a harmonic of running speed frequency.

If, and likely ONLY if, test data has ever been conducted on a specific machine, or the machine has been
modeled, we can assume that our misalignment predictions and diagnosis become very highly accurate
when identical or closely related problems or faults appear.

3
From experience, few instructors or reference works explain 0.5X adequately. The mathematical aspect does not
instantly reveal its implication: 0.5X means the phenomenon occurs once per 2 rotations, which would fit well with
a scenario of action-reaction such as a bouncing contact and then having time complete more than a full shaft
rotation before returning to that same contact. Alternately, we may at times find an explanation in vibrating string
theory, an area of study which is sorely neglected in CM/VA, yet finds its greatest pertinence in flexible and slender
9

rotors. As to 1.5X, the reader will likely have concluded that the physical manifestation could be a harmonic of
Page

0.5X, with the contribution to 1X lost or covered up by usual 1X concerns, or 1.5X may well be a 3X vibration
manifest every 2 turns of the shaft. The actual mechanism is case-dependent.
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

A Few Additional Considerations

Coupling Tolerance
Coupling manufacturers and vendors state acceptable tolerances, in terms of allowable misalignment,
by type. What do those tolerances say? What do they mean? Such references ONLY define how much
the coupling can withstand and still transmit mechanical power without quick or immediate failure of
the coupling itself. It has nothing to do with a permissible quantity of misalignment on your machine.

Belt-Drives
The purpose of this paper is not to address sheaves in particular, but on that topic, a few observations…

Sheave misalignment can be marginally more forgiving than coupling misalignment, but other failure-
types are possible. Sheaves exhibit a high-probability of eccentricity due to their manufacturing process.
They are cast-iron pieces, with some machining. In fact, reports of 0.001” eccentricity by inch of
diameter have been heard. So a 10” (25cm) sheave might be off by as much as 0.010” (250microns)

Unless using notched or toothed belts, 1:1 drive to driven is never seen, due to the almost inevitable
slight belt slippage on the driven pulley/sheave. Since RPMs will still be very close in terms of value, both
amplitude and phase interactions occur in spite of the small differentiation of RPM values. The rising
and falling amplitudes are then accompanied by a wide phase fluctuation.

Note: In such a case, the ratio can still be extremely close, such as 1:0.995, which then calls for
Synchronous Time Averaging to separate the frequencies, or extremely high resolution. Interaction of
the waveforms may still occur, though, meaning sympathetic or beat vibration. Such beat interaction
can make balancing a challenge.

An electric motor may have axial float or play to enable magnetic centering. When pursuing tight belt-
drive alignment tolerances, the motor rotor’s position during alignment must be representative of
working position.

Seen: belt "tugging" from belt vibration can result in fatigue shearing of a shaft at the bearing entrance
point (usually front of motor), and this is more readily seen on reciprocating machines. Longer shaft
segment overhang from bearing to sheave may be a contributor. It is best to keep the overhang short.

Belt dressing spray: a quick-fix solution to squealing belts and to slip, belt dressing can also be hazardous
where an electric motor is operating at borderline due to ambient temperature, power transmitted or
other undesirable circumstances (lower voltage, or unclean power, etc.). One case reported motor
failure upon spaying the belts. Not quite the dressing’s fault, but certainly a tie-in to sudden increased
power under already harsh working conditions.

As to configuration, we might call them "elongated" or "parallel", and base mounting might be deemed
shared (common structure) or independent.
10

Gyroscopic Effect, Moment of Inertia & Effect on Response Direction

Page

Readers will forgive the informal approach and utter lack of mathematical expression: the idea is to
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

make the phenomenon vivid, not to express it through formulae. As this is not a textbook, see Coriolis
effect, gyroscopes and the like, even on Youtube, for complete explanations.

From the spinning top to the toy gyroscope, the latter exhibiting a rotor with its mass highly
concentrated at its outer radius or periphery, we can draw simple observations from childhood play or
high-school physics experiences. The gyro usually comes with a little stand. When reaching the end of its
cycle, the whole gyro rotor turns slowly around the stand while being suspended in mid-air, supported
at one end by the stand, and at its other end by... nothing.

What can we conclude? Other than the dynamic reaction, nothing is acting to turn the rotor around the
pedestal, so that is part of the gyro effect. For a rotor in the field, that would mean a horizontal rotor
(usually solely vertical static load) applying a horizontal radial load to one of its bearings.

More importantly, and quite empirically, if the

gyro remains suspended in mid-air, supported
only at one end, we can conclude that the gyro
effect can reach at least HALF of the static load
(linked to rotor mass).

If the rotor static load applied to the bearing gets

"suspended", the shaft can do whatever it wants,
meaning, the dynamic loads will command the
shaft unhampered. As a note, a side effect is
underloading of rolling-element bearing, leading
to overheating, lack of lubricant film formation
and early failure.

Admittedly, the gyroscope rotor is purposely designed with greater peripheral mass, meaning a higher
Moment of Inertia, to favor the “spinning top” effect. An equivalent mass distribution would be harder
to find in real-world rotors.

Thermal Bow, Critical Speed Deformation & Bent Shaft

This is a case where both imbalance and misalignment will be present, but the root-cause is the bow,
which may otherwise be called an elastically (non-plastic, non permanent) bent shaft.

The characteristic behavior will be 180 out-of-phase axial measurements, but on sleeve bearings, this
may be challenging to measure or perceive. Radial phase (H with H, V with V) should be in-phase or
having little phase discrepancy. And misalignment also occurs between driver and driven rotors.

Those same symptoms can be introduced by a critical speed event (a resonance of the rotor) for the first
lateral mode, when any forcing frequency (Ff) matches or closely approximates the critical speed value
(Fn). How close the match needs to be to create deformation is dependent on damping.
11
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

On certain machines, maintaining slow rotation or having a prolonged period of same may be needed to
either avoid an elastic deformation or to remove it if the shaft remained in the same position for too
long. That would qualify as a temporarily bent shaft, can be removed with turning the shaft, and will
show symptoms as described in the previous paragraph. Those symptoms appear for a plastically (or
permanently) bent shaft.

Critical Speed or Natural Frequency Excitation

2X RPM or 3X RPM component of a rotor’s vibration response, often from misalignment, can match a
natural frequency Fn. The same can occur with a critical speed (a natural frequency) of the rotor. And as
many have found out the hard way, having a VFD controller to move the RPM around can make such
occurrences much more probable. For example, an overhung single-eye pump impeller driven by a 2-
pole motor will typically have a first critical speed in the (roughly) 2300-2800 CPM range. A VFD will
enable a match with RPM and of course the ensuing resonant amplification and rotor deformation.

See reference [14] for a primer on Critical Speed matters.

Misalignment Induced Vibration Response

As previously mentioned, several individuals and organizations conducted simulations and tests to
document the effects of misalignment and the expected behavior resulting from same.

What has mostly been left unsaid about these efforts is that conclusions drawn from such endeavors
ARE applicable to the (exact or identical) test-rig or machine used in testing, but NOT NECESSARILY
applicable to any other machine as a generalization. In fact, it is likely that altering any factor on the
actual initial machine used in testing will yield changes in behavior.

Stiffness, masses, configuration, power transmitted, function, base, foundation, lengths and distances,
motor design, rotor design, actual RPM(s), misalignment severity, misalignment type, shimming, soft
foot, coupling type, number of components in coupling, actual machine condition (such as any other
interfering factor, bearing damage, looseness, other) and other factors (temperature, pressure,
de/stabilizing effects, etc.) play a role in the final outcome.

From [12], the following are examples of behavior patterns observed with
the stated coupling type on a specific rotor-type, but is NOT meant to say
"this behavior ALWAYS matches this type".

The previous explains WHY we would rather state a fuzzy-logic approach

instead of hard-set rules. An expectation of 1X, 2X and/or 3X in ANY
permutation, plus number of coupling-component X RPM and harmonics,
plus a possibility of multiple harmonics due to shocks or amplitude
extremes, is likely the best "expected behavior" description.

For those poor souls who worked exclusively in displacement units, back
12

in the "old days", the previously described behavior might have gone
Page

unseen (3X 4-pole, or 3X 2-pole, means higher frequencies AND lower

 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

displacement amplitudes at those frequencies). To a lesser extent, the same might be said of proximity
probes.

Long-span alignment: for mills, multiple rotors, kilns or line-shafts where still extant, alignment is not
merely considered at the coupling or alternately, support locations. Some clutches can make the
alignment of individual components quite challenging. Care must be taken to have support rolls (on a
kiln), dryers (on a paper machine), parallel and on the level (for some) or on a straight-line incline
(where necessary by design). A long-range laser or theodolite may be needed to avoid having a winding
snake instead of a straight-line.

As to piping growth or shrinkage under normal process operation, or even masses, these will not be
present when attempting to align a machine. This can result in severe static loads as pipes are pulled to
match flanges with, for instance, a pump casing. Breakage can occur at the flange or casings can get
fractured (pump casings are often cast, and are thus brittle or fragile). Upon tension release, the come-
along or chain blocks used to impose a positional match will transfer static load to the casing.

Checking Your Work (the vibration pen rationale)

This may work for certain machine configurations, such as belt-drives, but since the millwright will not
be camping for 2 hours next to the machine, we can instantly grasp the inherent fallacy of solely
measuring overall amplitudes right at the restart moment: for machines with any significant thermal
growth, the latter is NOT achieved for some time, and the amplitudes SHOULD be higher until the
machine components expand to their final position. A good example is the NEMA electric motor
reception test, upon purchase or repair, where depending on size, the shop floor (as opposed to
installed in the plant) unloaded reception test requires a prolonged period of operation sometimes
measured in HOURS before the motor is deemed “warmed up” and stabilized, yet, the motor will never
reach full-load temperatures. As a note, there are now pens that do allow for 800-line FFT spectrum
collection to be downloaded to a PC.

On the topic of LOOSENESS

True, there are several possible frequency components to looseness. And the analyst should ALWAYS
endeavor to report WHERE the looseness occurs. IRD Mechanalysis may have been the original source of
the so-called Type A, B and C looseness, which are descriptive. In the same order, 1X, then 2X, and then
multiple harmonics (from banging, hammering, spikes). Keep in mind multiple harmonics from impacts
are mostly fictitious (save for the fundamental) and the spectral peaks arise from a picket-fence effect.

If the system can FOLLOW, looseness will most often be seen as 2X. This most likely occurs from 2
events per rotation when the system "lands" and when it reaches its vertical stop. Otherwise, 1X will be
the dominant identifier. BOTH in the vertical direction (unless the machine structure ties the rotor down
horizontally or on a slant). Often seen with soft foot / inadequate assembly cases.

An inability to complete an event cycle during a single rotation, perhaps due to inertia, may allow for 2
13

rotations before the event occurs anew. And that is 0.5X. On significant masses, the 0.5X is either
unusual, or often so low in amplitude as to be difficult to perceive.
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Appendix 1/ Misalignment Diagnostics Review from References

In [1], Edwards, Lees and Friswell refer to… Sekhar and Prabhu (1995) discussed the effect of coupling
misalignment on the vibration of rotating machinery. Shaft misalignment can be a major cause of vibration, due to
reaction forces generated in the shaft couplings. It is generally accepted that a significant 2X vibration response is
a major feature of bearing misalignment. A finite element model of the rotor-coupling-bearing system was
developed and the effect of misalignment was introduced through a coupling-co-ordinate system. The model
agrees well with empirical results, where the 1X response is not nearly as significantly affected as the 2X. By using
this model it is therefore possible to predict the vibration response due to misalignment at the various harmonics -
valuable in terms of both fault diagnosis and machinery design. Note: emphasis / bold is this writer’s handiwork.

From [2], Bloch & Geitner show a simplified model for parallel misalignment, and how the forced
excursion provoked by the misalignment might produce 2X RPM vibration.

14
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

In [3], the authors clearly document the sharp rise in 1X and 2X amplitudes with increasing coupling misalignment for
parallel and then for angular. For THEIR test rotor at that time, and graphed for 2 different RPMs.

Take note of the significant difference in amplitude progression, where the 2X response to misalignment evolves
much more rapidly for parallel misalignment as compared to angular misalignment.

The authors conclude “The 2X vibration response clearly shows the characteristic
signature of misaligned shafts”

In [4], we see a case for which the authors’ rotor, fitted with a jaw coupling, clearly shows the 3X amplitude increases
at their motor inboard horizontal as more severe misalignment is introduced.

15
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

From [5], the evolving amplitudes at 1X, 2X and 3X for increasing angular misalignment. Take note that
the amplitude scale is in m/s2, or the equivalent of 1/10th of a g per division.

For the specific rig or test rotor, fitted with a specified coupling, the 3X RPM amplitude increases as
misalignment gets more severe. As a passing note, this writer (Gagnon) prefers to use peak velocity for
this frequency range. Something can be said of preserving a transducer’s native units (accelerometer)
without integration, but this also skews the data in certain ways, alters our perception of amplitude
severity, inflates the relative importance of higher frequencies and since a large percentage of analysts
deal with CM data in velocity, relying on such units offers an easier correlate from experiments to field
16

data machine behavior.

Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Appendix 2
A Brief Exploration of the Consequences of Moving the Unbalance Vector Location Along a Machine Train

NOTE: use of this picture does not imply that the components are more, nor less, susceptible to
imbalance or misalignment than any other commercially available components.

Imbalance Location & Dynamic Load

We can imagine sliding the exact location of a punctual imbalance along the length of a direct-drive
assembly. The response will vary since the (imaginary) point of application alters the lever effect, and
thus, the reaction. This is merely meant as a thinking tool.

Motor rear
Fan: if the fan is out of balance, the reaction may be measurable on the ENTIRE motor if the motor is of
small-size, but the reaction would otherwise be mostly localized at the rear of the motor. An exception
can be found in cases where the motor base has low stiffness and allows the motor to pitch (as in
pitch/roll/yaw) axially. The shaft may orbit at the inboard location, but the bearing benefits from the
rotor length as a lever to control such movement.

Still at the back, but in front of the bearing, as opposed to behind it:, provokes a reaction in both
bearings, especially as we move towards the center, at which point we would expect reaction to be
almost equal in amplitude in both outboard and inboard positions, presuming equal stiffness, with due
consideration for the added mass/stiffness of the coupling and its influence at the inboard location.

Special case: a tilted rotor or 2 distinct imbalance vectors will generate some axial vibration
Special case 2: eccentric rotor (seen electrically) or bent shaft (180 out of phase axial measurements,
plus electrical 2X Fl vibration)
Special case 3: hot spot, causing a raised segment of the rotor, which then gets resolved dynamically as
17

imbalance + 2X Fl (thermography useful in diagnosis). Usually signifies an urgent need for motor repairs.
Page

Worst case CAN deform the rotor to imitate a bent shaft.

 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Special case 4: the bent shaft, a fairly rare occurrence on a motor unless a long overhang at the inboard,
a stiff coupling and severe loads contributed to that bend. A thermally induced bent shaft IS possible. A
bend (as opposed to a kink, which is a localized deformation) introduces imbalance, some misalignment
and some air-gap eccentricity.

Motor front
A highly localized imbalance at the front can be resolved balancing at the sheave or coupling, but the
question remains: WHY is it locally out of balance? Often from improper key-size relative to keyway.

Note: when considering rules applicable to response, one must seriously think about the inherent
differences between a 10HP, 50HP, 100HP or 500+HP motor in terms of length, mass, stiffness, and how
these relate to the base, and also, the foundation or support of said base.

Coupling type, overhang distance to coupling

A severe imbalance manifest at the FRONT will introduce a parallel misalignment. A severe couple
imbalance causing pitching may introduce a minor angular misalignment. Seen in the past: magnetic
couplings, allowing for variable-speed (RPM), may introduce significant localized masses on both driver
and driven shafts. This can affect rotor dynamics behavior. As they are unsupported, these may also
have much lower natural frequencies (Fn), and each shaft with its coupling half behaves like a
pendulum.

Coupling
An imbalance vector at the coupling means equal phases to either side of it, if it is the only acting force,
or if it is the dominant force in terms of a resulting vector, whereas amplitudes may differ (normally,
slightly) due to differences in stiffness from motor to driven rotor. A coupling can only introduce a
couple-effect if both coupling-halves are out of balance, the coupling is elongated and the imbalance
locations are diametrically opposed (or close to it). Rare case.

Couplings come in 2 states: working and locked. Locked usually means damage. Furthermore, it could be
dry. Consider the difference in friction coefficient between lubricated steel-steel contact, and dry steel-
steel contact (presuming of course that the components are made of steel), and then kinetic (sliding)
versus static friction. Lubricated steel in movement will thus show friction = 0.03 (appr.), whereas dry
sliding would see friction = 0.4. This next statement is an expedient fallacy, but serves to illustrate the
mechanics in play. Imagine a 100HP (75kW) full-load motor: to maintain axial sliding movement in the
(hopefully well lubricated) coupling, we must overcome the load from torque, so we might imagine that
the axial load would be equivalent to 3% of 100HP. Or 3HP reciprocating motion at the coupling. IF the
lubricant persists between the steel parts (while said lubricant gets centrifuged outwards, heats up,
etc.). Should lubricant disappear, or grit appear from wear, we have a possibility of much greater axial
thrust.
To launch the movement would be harder since we then consider static friction.
18

Driven-rotor (DR) inboard / DR center / DR outboard

Vector location progression more or less emulates the previous description of moving the vector(s)
Page

along, but in reverse from the motor (from front or inboard to back / outboard).
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Eccentricity: if the rotor is in contact or interaction with solids, any eccentric effect becomes huge. This
may be the case for electromagnetic, or liquid interaction as well. Unless severe pressures or high-
density fluids are involved, aerodynamic (or gas) interactions is more forgiving.

Between bearings / Overhung Rotor Considerations

For direct-drive overhung rotors, the static load is greater at the bearing closest to the driven
rotor, roughly 2:1. Gravity pulls the rotor downwards, and the bearing (and bearing cap especially)
closest the coupling must pull the shaft down to maintain equilibrium.

The dynamic response to imbalance involves a RATIO between the static load (and in some cases, quasi
static loads introduced by the rotor's function) and the imbalance vector.

Thus, an imbalance vector acting in the farthest plane of the overhung rotor has considerable effect on
the inboard bearing (closest to the coupling): the imbalance gets leverage from the overhang length,
and since the static load is lesser at that location, the response from the imbalance is more readily
influenced (meaning a greater amplitude). Lower force, greater reaction, due to leverage.

Belts alter the previous portrait. The belt tension becomes a significant static load contributor.

For the pictured fan, the rotor sits between

bearings, and thus, static loads are approximately
equal at each bearing location (presuming even
mass distribution and equal shaft lengths to
either side of rotor center of gravity) and are
applied downwards.

Excessive vibration amplitude

If and when the amplitude is disproportionately huge, anything goes: knocking in the coupling, bearings
knocking in the pillow (plummer) block, imbalance introducing misalignment, etc.

Note: in such cases, appropriate questioning to grasp HOW we got there, and how quickly, can be of
considerable help in establishing an accurate diagnosis.
19
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

References, with Some Commentary

[1] Edwards, Lees and Friswell, Fault Diagnosis of Rotating Machinery (Shock & Vibration Digest, Vol 30
Number 1, 1998

[2] H.P. Bloch and F.K. Geitner, Practical Machinery Management for Process Plants 2: Machinery failure
analysis and troubleshooting, Gulf Publishing Company, 1986

[3] Sekhar A.S. and Prabhu B.S., Effects of Coupling Misalignment on Vibrations of Rotating Machinery,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 1995

[4] P N Saavedra and D E Ramírez, Vibration analysis of rotors for the identification of shaft
misalignment Part 2: Experimental validation, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 2004

[5] G.R. Rameshkumar, B.V.A. Rao, K.P. Ramachandran, Coast Down Time Analysis to Analyze
the Effect of Misalignment in Rotating Machinery, International Journal of Engineering and Advanced
Technology (IJEAT), April 2012, where the authors examine the changes in CDT (Coastdown Time),
essentially a parallel to start-up time performance sometimes recommended (by us) in
consulting for large electric motors, recording the TWF, preferably for both current AND
vibration. In the presence of constant or comparable conditions, an increasing start-up time
points to deteriorating motor condition and warrants further investigation. Given the presence
of a working blower on their set-up, the authors actually study a machine per say.
[6] Lees, AW, Misalignment in Rigidly Coupled Flexible Rotors, Society of Experimental Mechanics, IMAC
XXV Proceedings, 2007, where Dr. Lees states “…the misalignment has introduced cross coupling
between torsional and lateral motion which implies that any synchronous variations in torque will be
reflected in twice per revolution lateral vibration” and alluding to earlier work, “The 2X excitation is clear”.

Whereas an excerpt of his conclusions affirm “It has been shown that the linear model generates
responses at harmonics of shaft speed.”, and “The harmonics are caused by an interaction of torsional
and flexural effects”

[7]] Redmond, I., Shaft Misalignment and Vibration - A Model, Society of Experimental Mechanics, IMAC
XXV Proceedings, 2007. From his simplified model, Redmond concludes that:

The equations provide insight to the situation where only shaft angular misalignment is present and,
surprisingly, demonstrate that in these circumstances system vibration does not occur. The resulting
static displacements lead to static loading of the supports and dynamic loading of the rotating elements.
The presence of coupling skew, or rotating angular misalignment, leads to the introduction of an angular
displacement-forcing function at a frequency corresponding to the rotor speed.

The system equations show clearly that parallel misalignment introduces a static displacement in addition
to fundamental-frequency (1X) lateral and torsional excitation components. A discrete second-harmonic
(2X) torsional excitation term is also evident in the system force vector. The magnitude of this term is
directly proportional to the support anisotropy and disappears for isotropic supports.
20

The above effects are demonstrated through numerical analysis of the equations of motion for a range of
model parameters where it is confirmed that:
• Both angular and parallel misalignment introduce a static loading, or preload, to the system.
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

• Angular misalignment alone produces only static system displacements. The introduction of transmitted
torque reduces the shaft misalignment angle leading to greater imposed static forces.
• The presence of an angularly skewed coupling produces 1X shaft lateral response when isotropic
supports are employed. The introduction of support anisotropy leads to 2X shaft axial response and 2X
loading of the rotating elements.
• Parallel misalignment alone produces both static and dynamic, multi-harmonic system response. The
presence of parallel offset introduces torsional response occurring mainly at fundamental and second
harmonic frequencies. The resulting speed oscillations couple through to the system lateral motions and
produce multi-frequency support and rotating element forces. Parallel misalignment also induces shaft
axial motion which is dominated by 1X and 2X response. Support anisotropy plays a major role in
determining system dynamic response, with greater divergence of support orthogonal stiffness values
leading to increased dynamic response. Increasing the parallel offset results in an increase of the 1X and
2X system dynamic response. The coupling angular stiffness is very influential in controlling the system
response, as would be expected, so that a reduction in this parameter leads to reduced dynamic
response, for a given parallel offset.

As far as the author is aware there is nothing in the literature outlining the relationship of angular and
parallel misalignment with rotor vibration as demonstrated in this paper, particularly with respect to the
importance of support anisotropy and lateral-torsional coupling in producing parallel misalignment-related
2X vibration and the inability of angular misalignment alone to produce shaft vibration.

While the conclusion pertaining to the response, or lack thereof, triggered by the presence of angular
misalignment contradicts much of the physical test measurements literature, as opposed to modeling,
the author’s exploration of stiffness isotropy and anisotropy in terms of expected vibration reaction
does expand the misalignment response knowledge-base. The comment does not seek invalidate
Redmond’s conclusions about HIS model.

[8] Fakhfakh, Hili, Hammami, and Haddar, Angular Misalignment Effect on Bearings Dynamical
Behavior. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, June 2004

The authors document the significant difference in response of a flexible versus a rigid coupling for, as
the title suggests, angular misalignment. And the responses at 1X, 2X as well as response at their
system’s Fn, and some modulation sideband families spaced at 1X and 2X around the Fn. As a note in
passing, the authors assumed this modulation was AM (amplitude modulation).

[9] Chao-Yang Tsai and Shyh-Chin Huang, Vibrations of a Rotor System with Multiple Coupler Offsets,
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

The authors conclude… “TMM (note: where TMM means Transfer Matrix Method) derivation and
numerical results in the present studies revealed the offset induced the rotor’s lateral response at
the same frequency as rotational speed (1X) and that was unlike most other research where
multiple integer (n X) components were found. Though reference [17] obtained results similar to
the present paper and concluded the absence of 2X components mainly due to no consideration of
bearing non-linear effects and shaft asymmetries.” - Note: Bold emphasis by Gagnon
21

[10] Nakhaeinejad, M., Ganeriwala, S., Observations on Dynamic Responses of Misalignments,

SpectraQuest Inc., Tech note, 2009, explore the vibration response differences with a number of test
Page

rotor and coupling variants.

 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

[11] Patel, T.H. and Darpe, A.K., Vibration Response of Misaligned Rotors, JSV 325, 2009

[12] Unknown author, Turvac Corp., Why Shaft Misalignment Continues to Befuddle and Undermine Even
the Best CBM and Pro-Active Maintenance Programs, maintenancerecources.com, Oct 2008

[13] Lorenc, J.A., Changes in Pump Vibration Levels Caused by the Misalignment of Different Style
Couplings, Proceedings 8th Pump Symposium, Texas A&M, 1991

The author has a marked advantage with the use of a test bench at Gould Pumps, Inc., facilities. The
pump is driven by a 100HP, 2-pole motor, with the pump at BEP. And tests ensue for steel couplings
(flexing beam, grid, gear and disc) and elastomer (shear x 2, compression, flexing beam x 2). This is a
good case to reinforce earlier discussion of test rotor versus actual machine.

Of note, a) for one coupling, the initial aligned vibration amplitude at 5X (linked to one elastomeric
coupling’s construction) DECREASED as misalignment increased, b) elastomeric couplings being more
forgiving of misalignment, save for extremes, c) extremely sharp amplitude increases for metallic
couplings once a threshold was reached, d) one case of 3X & 6X, due to coupling construction, and e)
one example of a harmonic series corresponding to the most severe misalignment (see below).

Note: the seemingly

unaffected spectral
contents in spite of
increasing parallel
misalignment severity,
until a threshold value (the
worst misalignment) is
reached.

[14] Swanson, E., Powell, C.D., Weissman, S., A Practical Review of Rotating Machinery Critical Speeds
and Modes, Sound & Vibration, May 2006

Other references deemed absorbed over time might be Buscarello, R., Berry, J., Eshleman, R., and B&K
22

books are all noteworthy in that respect.

Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Author’s Bio / François (Frank) Gagnon

Nearly 40 years in Condition Monitoring & Vibration Analysis,
studied mechanical engineering, built, managed, executed and
optimized dozens of CM programs in all industrial sectors, first
instructed a course in ’84, participated in various committees,
contract trainer for Entek IRD, TA and Update, has own curricula &
audit process, instructs Intro through Level 3/Cat IV, plus Asset
Management / Reliability and CM/VA Advanced & focused topics.

Certification held or lapsed: ASNT VA Central Lvl 3 (equivalent to but

more stringent than Cat IV), Entek/TA VA I, II, & III, VI Lvl 1.

Resolved thousands of cases, multilingual, at ease in metric or US/Imperial, current in reliability & Asset
Management tasks & PdM/Reliability integration, published papers (Shock&Vibration Digest, VI Annual
Meeting Proceedings, CMVA Annual), managed projects, consulted / instructed in 25+ countries

At the end of a training session, it is typical to tender an evaluation form, asking participants for
feedback, opinion, suggestions. That may exceed the scope of a white paper, but any feedback is still
welcome and appreciated. Send at fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Training Customized to your Needs / REMOTE Consulting & Support

Get an instructor who DID spend extensive time on the floor.

In pulp & paper, to touch upon one sector and its specific assets (not meant to be exhaustive): refiners,
pulpers, agitators (not the political kind), fan-pump, headbox, forming table, fourdrinier, felt life, paper
machine structures, dryer section, or Yankee dryer for tissue, presses, vacuum pumps, winder,
conversion equipment, embossing rolls, break problems, quality or profile versus prior event, etc.
Elsewhere, we will find roasters, grinders, mills, rolling or other, catalytic cracking compressors,
centrifugal, screw and reciprocating compressors, root blowers, machine tools, gas, steam and hydraulic
turbines (hydro are strange beasts), test benches, generators, DC motors, in-line or master/slave,
alternators, diesel engines, excavators, shovels, digesters, batch mixers, rotary kilns, ball mills, SAG mills,
crushers, shovels, excavators, pneumatic tools, synchronous & DC motors, asynchronous & VFDs, rolling
mills, wire drawing machines, and the whole catalog of fans, ID or FD, blowers and pumps, canned,
vertical, barrel, high-speed, high-pressure, boilers and combustion, etc.

Courses / English, French, Spanish, Portuguese

Introduction (Cat. I), and Cat. II through IV, as per ISO 18432-2 compliant certification, or ASNT
Advanced Topics
PdM / CBM Program Management & Audits
23
Page
 6402 25th Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H1T 3L6
Tel: 1 (514) 727 2084 / www.vibra-k.com / fgagnon@vibra-k.com

Time Waveform / Asynchronous Motors & VFDs / Machinery Acceptance Testing (New, Rebuilt,
Procurement) / Phase Analysis ^ODS / Basic Modal & FEA
Physical Asset Management Tasks / Exemplary Practices

24
Page