Re: Re:Predictive failures

"Don Y" <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote in message
news:uvmaet$1231i$2@dont-email.me...

On 4/16/2024 9:02 AM, Edward Rawde wrote:

Again, the goal is to be an EARLY warning, not an "Oh, Shit!  Kill the
power!!"
>

...

Add CO and heat detectors to the mix and they get *really* confused!
>

Better to inform the individual who can get the replacement done when the
tenant isn't even home.

>
So, a WiFi/BT link to <whatever>?  Now the simple smoke detector starts
suffering from feeping creaturism.  "Download the app..."

No thanks. I have the same view of cameras.
They won't be connecting outbound to a server anywhere in the world.
But the average user does not know that and just wants the pictures on their
phone.

>

The only exceptions, also drawing from other replies in this thread,
might
be be temperature sensing,
voltage sensing, current sensing, air flow sensing, noise sensing, iron
in
oil sensing,
and any other kind of sensing which might provide information on
parameters
outside or getting close to outside expected range.

>

Give that to some software which also knows how long the equipment has
been
in use, how often
it has been used, what the temperature and humidity was, how long it's
been
since the oil was changed,
and you might be able to give the operator useful information about when
to
schedule specific maintenance.

>
I have all of those things -- with the exception of knowing which sensory
data
is most pertinent to failure prediction.

That's one reason why you want feedback from people who use your equipment.

>
>
OTOH, if there is no oil in the gearbox, the equipment isn't going to
start; if the oil sensor is defective, then *it* needs to be replaced.

Preferably by me purchasing a new sensor and being able to replace it
myself.

...