Jitamitra executed fan project
ROOT-CAUSE · COMPLAINT

Clean at the works, shaking at site: three installation faults behind a cone rub

a plastics-machinery plant in Gujarat, via an industrial equipment OEM
a plastics-machinery plant in Gujarat, via an inAny make

At-a-Glance

Who A plastics-machinery plant in Gujarat, served through an industrial equipment OEM
Equipment A Jitamitra centrifugal blower, newly installed
Complaint "Cone touching and vibrations" — the inlet cone rubbing the impeller, plus objectionable vibration in service
Service Complaint investigation and root-cause analysis, from site photographs and the works test record
Response Site advice the same working period; formal QA findings two days after the complaint was raised
Result Fan proved sound at despatch (works vibration V 2.8 / H 2.4 / A 3.8 mm/s, inside the ISO 14694 rigid BV-3 acceptance limit of 4.5 mm/s). Three installation-stage faults found; corrective instructions issued to site. The record documents the diagnosis and the actions given — not a post-fix re-check, so we do not claim one.

The Setup

The fan went through an OEM partner to a plastics-machinery plant in Gujarat — a straightforward centrifugal blower on a new installation. The kind of unit nobody is supposed to think about once it is bolted down and running.

Which is why a vibration complaint on a new install carries weight out of proportion to its size. Vibration is how an installation quietly destroys itself: it walks fasteners loose, chews bearings, cracks the ductwork the fan is bolted to. And when it appears in the first weeks of life, the conclusion on the shop floor is the uncomfortable one — you sold us a bad fan. At stake was the OEM's credibility with their end customer, and ours with the OEM.

The Complication

The complaint named two symptoms in one line: cone touching, and vibrations.

"Cone touching" means the inlet cone — the bellmouth feeding air into the impeller eye — was fouling the rotating shroud. A running-clearance failure: the gap between a stationary part and a spinning one had been lost.

Here is the trap. A cone rub is itself a vibration source, so the obvious path was to treat the rub as the disease: an out-of-true impeller, a fan that came out of the works wrong. That path is wrong. The rub was a symptom — something had pushed cone and impeller out of concentricity, and it had happened after the fan left our floor.

The Diagnosis & Fix

We worked it in the only order that settles an argument like this: prove or disprove the fan first, then look outward.

Step one — rule out the fan. The blower had been run and measured before despatch: V 2.8 / H 2.4 / A 3.8 mm/s. Under ISO 14694 for a rigidly-mounted fan, BV-3 accepts up to 4.5 mm/s (alarm 7.1, shutdown 9.0). Every axis sat comfortably inside acceptance. Whatever was shaking at site had been acquired after despatch.

Step two — read the site. Seven photographs came with the complaint, and they did the rest of the work. Three faults, all at the installation stage:

  1. No proper foundation. The blower was not bolted down — anchor bolts had simply not been used. An unrestrained base cannot absorb running forces; it amplifies them.
  2. The transit spacer was still fitted. The yellow-painted C-spacer that supports the inlet and outlet flexible flanges during transport had never been removed before start-up — hard-linking the fan to the very ducting it was meant to be isolated from.
  3. Misalignment. The assembly centreline and the fan centreline did not match: the direct mechanical route to a cone rubbing an impeller.

Cause chain: spacer left in, no foundation bolts, misalignment → running clearance lost at the cone → contact and unrestrained running forces → high vibration at site, from a fan demonstrably within tolerance at the works.

Why did the fan vibrate? The inlet cone was rubbing the impeller and the base was not restrained. Why was the cone rubbing? The assembly centreline and the fan centreline did not match. Why was the base unrestrained? No anchor bolts had been used, and a transit spacer still hard-linked the flexible flanges. Why did commissioning proceed anyway? Nothing forced foundation, alignment and clearance to be checked and signed off before the machine was energised. Root cause: the fan was commissioned without a gated pre-start check. Transport and erection artefacts were left in the machine, and nobody was required to prove otherwise before the button was pressed.

The reusable lesson: a fan is not a component you install — it is a rotating assembly you commission. Every transport restraint removed, every anchor bolt torqued, every running clearance verified, before first start, as a signed step. Anything a fan acquires between the works and the foundation will present itself as a fan defect.

The Result

Reported honestly, so it is worth something to you:

  • We proved the fan was good at despatch. The works record — V 2.8 / H 2.4 / A 3.8 mm/s, inside BV-3's 4.5 mm/s acceptance — is objective evidence the machine was within tolerance when it left us.
  • We found three specific, correctable installation faults in the site photographs: transit spacer not removed, no bolted foundation, assembly-to-fan misalignment.
  • We issued the corrective actions: remove the yellow C-spacer from the inlet and outlet flexible flanges; provide a properly bolted foundation; correct the alignment of the assembly to the fan centreline.
  • We changed our own process. This case is why transit-spacer removal, anchor-bolt sign-off and a running-clearance check are commissioning-checklist lines — and why the works vibration certificate travels with the fan, so any site can separate a works issue from an erection issue immediately.
  • What the record does not confirm: our file documents the diagnosis and the instructions issued. It does not contain a post-fix vibration re-check or a customer closure sign-off. We will not claim an outcome we cannot evidence. What we stand behind is the finding and the corrective action delivered.

The Takeaway + Call to Action

The lesson is a diagnostic discipline, not a fan fact. When a new installation vibrates, the fan is the last suspect — but only if you can prove it. That proof has to exist before the argument starts, which is why a works vibration record travelling with the machine beats any amount of debate on site. Get the certificate, then go and look at the foundation, the transit restraints and the alignment — the photographs usually give you the answer before anyone opens a casing. And if a spacer painted bright yellow can survive to first start-up, so can yours: make its removal a signed line, not a memory.

We service centrifugal fans and blowers of any make — vibration investigation, alignment and running-clearance checks, balancing to ISO 21940, and performance testing to IS 4894 / ISO 5801 / AMCA 210 method. If a fan on your plant is shaking and nobody can tell you why, we will come and find out.

Jitamitra Electro Engineering · Technical Services

Engineered for Every Application.

Ready to quote?

Send us the duty point. We'll quote in 3 working days.*

Flow, static, gas temperature, application — or attach a spec, GA drawing or a multi-fan schedule. Engineer to engineer.

Get a quote → Email the desk

ISO 9001:2015 quality system · performance-tested to IS 4894 / ISO 5801 / AMCA 210 method · witnessed FAT on request, at no cost.

*For our standard range, additional days required for special projects