A message that a motor is vibrating leaves the maintenance planner with several unanswered questions. Which asset, when did it change, and what must be arranged before inspection? The following six-part handover is a suggested work record, following the distinction between screening, diagnosis, correction and verification.
1. Identify the machine and the event
Record what was observed before naming a failed component. An alert starts an investigation; it does not establish the cause.
1. Asset and symptom
Give the asset identifier, location, driven equipment and observed symptom. Attach the relevant event or trend with its timestamp.
2. Operating context
State whether the event occurred during startup, steady operation or stopping. Add load or speed changes and the name of the person who observed it.
Sources: [2]
2. Give the planner enough information to arrange inspection
The planner needs machine history and production context to prepare the work. The authorized site personnel determine urgency, access and any shutdown.
3. Relevant history
Link the previous work request, recent repairs and unresolved findings. Keep a suspected cause separate from a technician’s confirmed diagnosis.
4. Access and production impact
Record the available inspection window, standby equipment and required coordination. Identify who must agree access or an interruption to production.
3. Make the handover and follow-up visible
Avoid closing the event simply because someone has received the message. Keep the inspection result and the next decision with the original request.
5. Assigned reviewer
Record the person accepting the request, the next action and agreed review date. Document any reason for deferring work.
6. Completion evidence
Retain findings, work performed and the responsible person’s acceptance. Attach follow-up condition readings where relevant and state any issue that remains unresolved.
Frequently asked questions
Should every alert become a repair instruction?
It may first become an inspection request. A qualified person should establish the cause and necessary work before a suspected fault is treated as confirmed.
Does condition monitoring replace a maintenance work-order system?
Monitoring provides condition evidence. Work authorization, scheduling, parts and closure need an agreed maintenance process; review any required system integration separately.
Connect condition evidence with maintenance decisions
Explore DigitechX Machine Condition Monitoring Software. Bring an actual motor event and work request to review which readings and history should accompany the handover.
Click to view details
References
- U.S. DOE: Operations & Maintenance Best Practices Guide, chapters 5–6
- Fluke: From Screening to Correction, the Predictive Maintenance Workflow
Information and sources reviewed: 8 October 2026