Best practices: Oil analysis vs. microscopic debris analysis: When and why to choose

Practicing Oil Analysis

Volumn , Issue MAY/JUNE, 2004, Pages

  Smith, Mark ^a  

^a Analysts Inc

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2542491243     PISSN: 15363937     EISSN: None     Source Type: Trade Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Anderson, D. (1982). Wear Particle Atlas (revised edition). Report NAEC-92-163.
2. Bensch, Dr.L.E. (1991). A Modern Review of Field Contamination Levels Based On Analyses of 25,000 Samples. Retrieved from http://www.particle.com/whitepapers_hiac/benscha.htm.
3. Ding, Dr. J. (2003, September-October). Determining Fatigue Wear Using Wear Particle Analysis Tools. Practicing Oil Analysis.
4. Dory, S.H. and Hansen, T. (2003, September-October). Magnetic Plug Inspection Enhances Condition-Based Maintenance. Practicing Oil Analysis.
5. Hunt, T. and Roylance, B. (1999). The Wear Debris Monitoring Handbook.
6. Omole, S. (2001, November-December). New Dimension to Failure Analysis, Using XRF Technology. Practicing Oil Analysis.
7. Rhine, W.E., Saba, C.S. and Kaufman, R.E. (1986, Vol. 42, #12). Metal Particle Detection Capabilities of Rotating-Disc Emission Spectrometers. Lubrication Engineering.