Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

A new method for the vibration amplitude assessment of the ESP systems
considering the vibration orbit
Galdir Reges a, *, Marcio Fontana a, Erbet Costa a, Antonio Lima a, Marcos Ribeiro b,
Leizer Schnitman a
a
Universidade Federal da Bahia, Graduate Program in Mechatronics (PPGM), CTAI, Rua Professor Aristides Novis, 02, Federação, Salvador, BA, CEP 40210-630,
Brazil
b
Petrobras Research and Development Center (CENPES/PETROBRAS), Av. Horácio Macedo, 950, Cidade Universitária, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP
21941- 915, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Index Terms: To avoid premature operational failure of the ESP systems, their vibration levels must be evaluated for accep­
Electrical submersible pump tance before installation. The vibration assessment of Electrical Submersible Pump (ESP) systems and other
Rotating machine rotating machines considers that the most important amplitude occurs in the radial orientation. Typical vibration
Vibration estimation
amplitude estimation uses radial orthogonal sensors and considers the maximum vibration amplitude between
Frequency analysis
Fault detection
the two sensor signals. However, this approach does not account for the orbit’s shape, leading to an error up to
41,4% between the maximum estimated amplitude in each sensor and the maximum radial vibration amplitude,
the orbit semi-major axis. This paper proposes a method to generate a frequency spectrum with invariance to the
shape of the vibration orbit, namely the Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum. The proposed method is compared to
the typical vibration amplitude estimation approach using individual sensor signals and the Full Spectrum
method. The methods are applied on vibration signals from two pumps at different wear states, and results are
analyzed. The estimation error of the vibration amplitude in ESP systems due to disregarding the shape of the
vibration orbits is shown. The results indicate that the proposed method presented the maximum radial vibration
amplitudes of each orbit frequency component (orbit semi-major axis), which is not directly possible with the
Full Spectrum and is impossible with the individual frequency spectrum. The orbit semi-major axis amplitudes of
the pumps were up to 28% higher than the maximum amplitude estimated from the individual orthogonal
sensors.

1. Introduction they must be evaluated for acceptance before installation.

Electrical Submersible Pump (ESP) systems are ideally suited to
pumping high volumes at high pressure. The petroleum industry applies
the system to pump petroleum at a high flow rate in offshore applica­
tions. These pumping systems are widely used for multiphase high
viscous flow in the oil industry (Barrios Castellanos et al., 2020). ESP
systems account for approximately 10% of the world’s crude oil pro­
duction (Takacs, 2017). ESP-based pumping systems have higher
installation and intervention costs than alternative artificial lift
methods, especially in deep undersea wells (Ribeiro et al., 2005). In
addition, ESP systems often operate in high-output petroleum wells, and
faults in these machines usually result in significant production losses.
Therefore, to avoid premature operational failure of the ESP systems,
ESP systems are rotating machines, and one way to evaluate and
detect faults in rotating machines is to compare their vibration ampli­
tudes with standards of vibration severity (Adams, 2010). Vibration
standards are published by leading standards organizations such as the
International Standardization Organization (ISO), the International
Electrical Committee (IEC), and the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI). The API RP 11S8 document – Recommend Practice on
Electric Submersible Pump System Vibrations (API, 2012) - is the stan­
dard guide used for vibration assessment of Electrical Submersible Pump
systems with ESP systems. With the specialist’s experience, this standard
is used to decide whether to approve an ESP system for installation. An
alternative approach to detect faults is to compare the vibration
amplitude at each measurement point on each machine to previously

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: galdir.junior@ufba.br (G. Reges).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2022.110214
Received 8 August 2021; Received in revised form 18 November 2021; Accepted 21 January 2022
Available online 26 January 2022
0920-4105/© 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
G. Reges et al.
Fig. 1. Artificial signals from X and Y orthogonal sensors with one sinusoidal component with the same frequency but different amplitudes and phases. a) X sensor
signal in the time domain. b) Y sensor signal in the time domain. c) orbit from the combination between X and Y sensors signals with the maximum radial amplitude
indicated in the ellipsis semi-major axis.
measured amplitudes. When machines are in good condition, vibration
amplitudes typically remain stable (when operated at the same load and
speed), but changes in vibration amplitudes may indicate a change in the
health condition. Whether the fault detection approach uses vibration
amplitude standards as a reference or compares current amplitudes with
previous measures, the estimated amplitudes must be as accurate as
possible.
ESP vibration is a complex phenomenon, and recent works presented
advances in understanding it, for example, working with modal analysis
(Castillo et al., 2019; Minette et al., 2016) and analyzing the interstage
pressure (Yang et al., 2021a, 2021b, 2021a). Many studies have pre­
sented different approaches to assess the rotating machines vibration
levels for fault detection and diagnosis, including techniques that deal
with estimation errors from the DFT (Discrete Fourier Transform), and
have demonstrated advances in the area (Boldt et al., 2014; Ciabattoni
et al., 2017; Elbhbah and Sinha, 2013; Garcia-Perez et al., 2011;
Mohanty et al., 2012; Reges et al., 2021; Tsypkin, 2013; Wang and Hu,
2006). However, there is a source of estimation errors that are usually
disregarded, the trajectory of the vibratory movement of the rotating
machines in orbital elliptic motion. Typical vibration amplitude
assessment uses the maximum vibration amplitude between two
orthogonal sensor signals. However, this approach leads to an error
between the estimated amplitude in each sensor and the maximum
radial amplitude.
One technique to analyze orbits is the frequency spectrum of com­
plex signals, which decomposes the orbit signals into orbit components.
In recent years, similar techniques have been used to investigate vi­
bration characteristics of rotating machinery faults (Chen et al., 2017; L.
Chen et al., 2016a, b; ; Jung et al., 2017; Lang et al., 2015; Liu and Qu,
2008; Patel and Darpe, 2009; Qu et al., 2018). The techniques were
presented under several names, with the Full Spectrum being the most
famous one. However, the frequency spectrum of complex signals does
not allow direct access to the maximum radial amplitude, which is the
orbit’s semi-major axis, and the amplitudes of this spectrum cannot be
individually compared to vibration standards limits. This type of spec­
trum is significantly different from the individual signal frequency
spectrum and can be considered counterintuitive. Therefore, the diffi­
culty of analyzing the frequency spectrum of complex signals may have
limited the widespread use of the maximum radial amplitude in vibra­
tion analysis of rotating machines.
This paper proposes a method to estimate a spectrum with orbit
components’ maximum radial amplitude, hence estimating the vibration
amplitudes with invariance to the shape of the vibration orbit. The
spectrum, namely the Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum, is proposed to
allow higher accuracy on ESP acceptance analysis and further diagnosis
2
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214
accuracy. The proposed method is compared to the typical vibration
amplitude estimation approach using individual sensor signals and the
Full Spectrum method. Moreover, these methods are applied to vibra­
tion signals from two different Electrical Submersible Pumps, and results
are analyzed.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 pre­
sents an overview of rotating machines’ vibration analysis. Section 3
describes the experimental data acquisition, the orbit decomposition
theory, procedures to generate individual frequency spectrum, Full
Spectrum, and the proposed Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum. Section 4
presents the application of the traditional methods and the proposed
methods. Finally, the conclusions are shown in Section 5.
2. Background
The API RP 11S8 document includes considerations and definitions
about vibrations in ESP systems. In that document, the potential vibra­
tion sources are listed, such as mass unbalance, flow disturbance from
turbulence and cavitation, misalignment of rotating components, jour­
nal bearing rotation, oil whirl, and mechanical rubbing. The API RP
11S8 also presents relations between vibration frequencies to probable
causes. These vibration frequencies are orders of the synchronous fre­
quency, the shaft speed, which in turn is approximately the motor’s
magnetic rotating field with the difference of a slip frequency that varies
with the torque load (Randall, 2010). Therefore, the synchronous fre­
quency is the rotating speed of the pump. There is no tachometer to
measure the rotating speed in a real ESP installation, and then it is
detected in the vibration spectrum. The orders observed by the AP RP
11S8 are 0.33, the range between 0.42 and 0.48, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, and the
range from 5 to 10. For example, the API RP 11S8 document shows that
vibrations at order 2 (twice the synchronous frequency) are related to
bent shaft fault and misalignment fault as probable causes. In another
example, vibrations at order 0.5 frequency (half the synchronous fre­
quency) are related to mechanical rub fault and bearing rotating fault as
probable causes. Therefore, the frequencies of the orders listed in the
API RP 11S8 are analyzed in the ESP vibration assessment.
Severe vibration can decrease the ESP system’s run-life, as occurs
with any rotating machinery. Before trying to diagnose a fault, any fault
must be detected. Hence, for all ESP components, the API recommends a
maximum vibration velocity of 3.962 mm/s peak amplitude in the
synchronous frequency (order 1) and 2.540 mm/s peak amplitude for all
other frequencies. This limit must be applied for operation in the man­
ufacturer’s recommended flow, pressure, and speed ranges. In this way,
a human expert assesses the ESP vibration looking for amplitude peaks
above those limits to decide whether to approve an ESP system for
G. Reges et al.
Fig. 2. The ESP system accelerometer installation schematics: a) accelerometer distribution between the three main components b) fastening the accelerometers with
a designed and built mounting fastened with a steel strip (Reges et al., 2021).
installation or not.
The conventional vibration amplitude analysis approach uses the
systematic display of frequency content corresponding to a vibration
sensor. Each vibration sensor measures movement along its orientation
axis. As there is any structural asymmetry in the machines, due, for
example, to manufacturing imperfections, the radial vibrations in the
vertical and horizontal directions can be different. Therefore, sensors are
usually installed orthogonally in the vertical and horizontal directions or
at an angle relative to the horizontal direction. However, the signal vi­
brations from each sensor are typically handled individually, and the
shape of the motion orbit is not considered.
Vibrations are manifestations of a machine’s internal forces and
stresses. When the vibration is evaluated from its amplitude, the stress
that this amplitude can cause is being evaluated (Randall, 2010). When
the shape of a vibration orbit is not circular but an ellipse, the maximum
radial amplitude is the amplitude of the semi-major axis of the ellipsis
shape. However, not necessarily the ellipse’s major axis will be directed
towards the orientation of the vibration sensors. The difference between
the amplitude observed by the individual sensors and the maximum
radial amplitude affects the estimation of rotating machine vibration
amplitude and its stresses.
In rotating machines, when one or more bearings or pedestals have
anisotropic stiffness, which means different stiffness depending on the
direction, or damping coefficient matrices, the steady-state unbalance
response orbits are ellipses (Adams, 2010). Furthermore, in thin and
long rotors, such as large steam turbogenerators or ESP pump systems,
the elliptical response orbits’ size, shape, and orientation change
depending on the axial position and vibration shape modes.
A simple way to observe the vibration of a rotating machine is the
orbit graph, whether of the shaft, bearing, or housing (Lees, 2016).
Orbits are Lissajous patterns of time-domain signals plotted simulta­
neously in the X–Y coordinate plane (Scheffer and Girdhar, 2004). The
orbit is plotted from signals from orthogonal sensors that measure
displacement, velocity, or acceleration and describe the machine’s
movement in the radial plane (Cesar Da Costa et al., 2018). For instance,
Fig. 1a and Fig. 1b show two artificial signals from orthogonal sensors,
each with one sinusoidal component with a 60 Hz frequency. Fig. 1a
shows the signal from the simulated X direction, and the sinusoidal
component has 0.9 mm/s amplitude and 0 radians phase. Fig. 1b shows
the signal from the simulated Y direction, and the sinusoidal component
has 1.11 mm/s amplitude and 1.256 radians phase. Fig. 1c shows the
orbit plotted with signals X and Y, with maximum amplitudes indicated
3
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214
in each axis. The differences in amplitude and phases between the si­
nusoidal components lead to the elliptical shape. It can be observed that
the maximum radial amplitude of the elliptical orbit does not occur in
vertical or horizontal axes but at an angle between the two, in the
semi-major axis of the elliptical shape. The difference between the
maximum amplitude estimated individually in X and Y axes and the
maximum radial amplitude leads to an imprecise vibration assessment
of the ESP system, The inaccuracy in the ESP vibration assessment can
lead to an installation acceptance of an inappropriate ESP and prema­
ture failure of the system. It is important to note that the maximum
difference occurs when the semi-major axis angle is at 45◦ to the X axis
and the orbit’s shape is extremely thin, a straight line. In that orbit
configuration with the maximum difference, using the Pythagorean
theorem, the maximum difference is up to 41,4%.
3. Materials and methods
3.1. Experimental setup
A detailed description of the data acquisition experimental apparatus
and procedures used in this study was published by Reges et al. (2021)
and Costa et al. (2021) and is summarized here.
The data collection experiments were executed in the artificial ver­
tical well at the Center of Technological Training in Industrial Auto­
mation (CTAI) at the Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), with industrial
equipment to reproduce the petroleum well-field environment in a
laboratory.
The experiments were done with two used Baker Hughes pumps,
both 400PMXSSD models, series 400, type P4, with 70 stages. One of the
pumps came from the owner’s storage (pump #1) and the other from an
operational oil well (pump #2), thus with different health conditions.
The pump model has a 2.14 m length, 10.16 cm diameter, and 109 kg
weight. The pumps were in good physical condition, according to the
owner’s maintenance team.
The ESP system consists of 3 main components, a Motor, a Seal
Chamber, and the Pump itself. The pumps were mounted with the same
motor (FMHX 18HP 465 V/25 A - Serie 450) and seal chamber
(FSB3XFER SB PFSA HL - Serie 400). The pumps were tested with the
same viscous fluid, the LUBRAX XP 10, produced by Petrobras and
formulated from paraffinic petroleum mineral oils.
The ESP pumps vibration acquisition was performed following the
recommended practice document API RP 11S8 (API, 2012) from the
G. Reges et al.
Fig. 3. An elliptical orbit is described as a sum of two counter-rotational vectors, one with Rf amplitude and another with Rb amplitude.
American Petroleum Institute, using six accelerometers installed in
orthogonal pairs in 3 sections, top, middle, and base, with the top and
base section 10 cm away from the extremes, as shown in Fig. 2a. The
axial distance between the accelerometer install sections was 64.6 cm.
The accelerometers were fixed in the ESP sections with a mounting
designed and built for this purpose. The mountings were fastened with a
steel belt, as shown in Fig. 2b, and did not present any degree of
freedom. The accelerometer installation was designed to withstand an
environment simulating real oil production conditions, which is un­
suitable for other commonly used mounting techniques. This work focus
on frequencies below 1000 Hz, which, according to the accelerometer’s
manufacturer, are unaffected by the mounting technique.
The accelerometers were industrial quartz shear ICP® model 624B11
by IMI Sensors with (±5%) 100 mV/g model sensitivity, 0.8–10,000 Hz
frequency range, and ±50 g measurement range. During data process­
ing, the individual calibrated sensitivity from the manufacturer’s
accredited calibration was used. The accelerometers were connected to
data acquisition modules NI-9234 (24-bit resolution, 102 dB dynamic
range, and antialiasing filters) in a data acquisition chassis cDAQ-9172,
both from National Instruments (NI), which guaranteed synchronized
acquisitions.
3.2. Orbit decomposition theory
Just as the individual vibration signals can be analyzed through
decomposition by the Fourier Transform into a frequency spectrum of
sinusoid components, the vibration orbit can be decomposed into orbital
components in the frequency spectrum of complex signals (Qu et al.,
1989; Southwick, 1993). Furthermore, information about each orbital
component, such as rotation direction, radial amplitude, and angle to
the horizontal sensor axis, can be extracted.
The frequency spectrum of complex signals decomposes the orbit,
observed by two radial and orthogonal sensors, into sinusoid compo­
nents called corotational or forward components, and counter-rotational
or backward components, through the Fourier transform. Similar
4
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214
techniques have been presented under several names, such as Hol­
ospectrum (Qu et al., 1989), Full Spectrum (Southwick, 1993), and
Directional Spectra (Lee, 1993). The Holospectrum presents the result of
the frequency spectrum of complex signals as a graph with several
orbital components, each component being an orbit for each frequency
chosen to analyze. Full Spectrum and Directional Spectra present a
frequency spectrum different from the traditionally used, with negative
frequencies representing the counter-rotational components and posi­
tive frequencies representing the corotational ones.
Full Spectrum, and other similar methods, have been used in recent
years in the investigation of vibration characteristics of rotating ma­
chinery defects (Chen et al., 2017; L. Chen et al., 2016a, b; Lang et al.,
2015; Liu and Qu, 2008; Patel and Darpe, 2009; Qu et al., 2018). These
works used characteristics of orbital components as ellipticity and
rotation direction to diagnose failures but not to assess the maximum
radial vibration level. Liang et al. (2013) proposed a method to generate
a spectrum with the maximum radial vibration amplitudes based on
individual spectra calculations. Jung et al. (2017) proposed a method to
transpose the vibration signals to arbitrary directions, simulating extra
sensors and estimating the direction and maximum radial vibration.
Those methods have many steps, so estimating the maximum radial
vibration with fewer steps is welcome.
The Full Spectrum theoretical basis is the fact that two orthogonal
sensor signals with orientations X and Y can describe the orbit in the
complex plane as
c(t) = x(t) + iy(t), (1)
Following the basic concept of Fourier analysis of describing signals
as a sum of sinusoid components, the signals x(t) and y(t) can be defined
by
x(t) = Ax cos(( ωt + θx )) = Axs sin ωt + Axc cos ωt,
(2)
y(t) = Ay cos ωt + θy = Ays sin ωt + Ayc cos ωt,
where A is the amplitude, ω is the angular frequency, and θ is the phase.
Axs and Axc are respectively the amplitude of the sinusoidal component
G. Reges et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214

Fig. 4. The procedure used to obtain the Frequency Spectrum.

and cosinusoidal component, both from the x(t) signal. Ays and Ayc are elliptical orbit is the sum of both vectors when their angles are the same,
respectively the amplitude of the sinusoidal component and cosinusoi­ and then the angle can be disregarded in a vector sum. The semi-major
dal component, both from the y(t) signal. These amplitudes are defined axis m and the semi-minor axis n (half of the minor axis) of the elliptical
by orbit are given by the following expressions
⃒ ⃒ ⃒⃒ ⃒ ⃒
Axs = Ax sin θx , Axc = Ax cos θx , m = ⃒Rf ⃒ + |Rb |, n = ⃒⃒Rf ⃒ − |Rb |⃒. (9)
(3)
Ays = Ay sin θx , Ayc = Ay cos θy .
Considering that the amplitude of interest of a signal component is
Using Euler’s formula, the complex exponential forms for the sine the peak amplitude, hence from 0 to the maximum amplitude of the sine
and cosine functions are wave, the semi-major axis amplitude is the peak amplitude equivalent in
1 ( iωt ) 1 ( iωt ) the orbit. If someone wants the peak-to-peak amplitude analysis, the
sin ωt = e − e− iωt
, cos ωt = e + e− iωt
, (4) equivalent is the magnitude of the major axis, therefore twice the
2i 2
amplitude of the semi-major axis.
where i is the imaginary unit, and e is the Euler’s number and the base of Applying the Fourier transform to the complex signal created with
natural logarithms. Substituting the components of Eq. (4) into Eq. (2) the x(t) and y(t) orthogonal signals, x(t) + iy(t), generates the frequency
and then into Eq. (1), we have spectrum of the complex signal, also called the Full Spectrum. While the
Fourier transform applied to individual signals presents duplicated fre­
1 [( ) ( )]
c(t) = Ax cos θx + Ay sin θy + i − Ax sin θx + Ay cos θy eiωt , quency components, thus symmetric, the Fourier transform applied to
2 (5)
1 [( ) ( )] complex signals is not symmetrical. The Fourier transform complex
+ Ax cos θx − Ay sin θy + i Ax sin θx + Ay cos θy e− iωt . coefficients cause a division of the individual signal components into
2
equal parts, leading to a real part symmetry of the frequency spectrum
c(t) can then be expressed as two rotation components as below result. However, the result of the Fourier transform applied to complex
signals is asymmetric, separating real and imaginary components of the
c(t) = Rf ei(ωt+βf ) + Rb e− i(ωt+βb ) , where complex signal into corotational and counter-rotational components.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
)2̅
1 ( )2 (
Rf =
2
Ax cos θx + Ay sin θy + − Ax sin θx + Ay cos θy , (6) 3.3. Individual Frequency Spectrum method
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
1 ( )2 ( )2
Rb = Ax cos θx − Ay sin θy + Ax sin θx + Ay cos θy .
2 This work processes accelerometer signals according to the diagram
shown in Fig. 4 to obtain their frequency spectra. This process for the
Eq. (6) demonstrates that an elliptical orbit decomposes into two
individual frequency spectrum is the same used in (Reges et al., 2021)
synchronous rotation vectors, one corotational with radius Rf and the
and is summarized here.
other counter-rotational with radius Rb , both with angular velocity ω as
In the pre-processing step, the vibration acquired signals are con­
shown in Fig. 3
verted first from volt units (V) to acceleration units (m/s2) according to
At time t = 0, both vectors are positioned relative to the x-axis by
accelerometer sensitivity. The direct current (DC) voltage level was
their respective angles βf and βb .
removed by subtracting the mean of each signal. Next, a Butterworth IIR
( )
− Ax sin θx + Ay cos θy high-pass filter of order two with a cut-off of 10 Hz is applied to prepare
βf = arctan ,
Ax cos θx + Ay sin θy for subsequent integration. The industry-recommended practice uses
( ) (7) velocity units to evaluate the vibration, so the signals were converted
Ax sin θx + Ay cos θy
βb = arctan . from acceleration units to velocity units (in/s) using trapezoidal inte­
Ax cos θx − Ay sin θy
gration. After integration, the Butterworth IIR high-pass filter is applied
Moreover, the angle φ formed between the X axis and the major axis again to eliminate low-frequency anomalies common to the integration
of the ellipse is the mean of the angles of the two vectors as in the process. The truncation required to convert the signal into a finite length
equation causes the leakage effect, which leads to an amplitude error in the fre­
quency spectrum, and this problem is typically treated with window
βf + βb
φ= . (8) functions. Finally, the Hann window function is applied to the signals to
2
reduce the leakage effect. The Hann window function (also called the
When Rf > Rb the orbit has a forward rotation direction, and when Hanning window) is commonly used in this field because it balances
Rf < Rb the direction is reversed (backward). noise injection and amplitude accuracy (Brandt, 2011).
The amplitude of the semi-major axis (half of the major axis) of the After the pre-processing, the computation of Discrete Fourier

Fig. 5. The procedure used to obtain the Full Spectrum.

5
G. Reges et al.
Fig. 6. Individual frequency spectra from the artificial signals in Fig. 1 and the Full Spectrum from the same signals.
Transform (DFT) is applied, being efficiently carried out by a Fast
Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithm (Oppenheim, 1999).
The DFT results in complex numbers, and then the true amplitudes
are extracted by the square root of the complex number squared. The
DFT of individual signals presents duplicated frequency components,
presenting a symmetrical result in half of the spectrum, with half the
amplitudes on both sides. In the post-processing, the single-sided spec­
trum is computed, discarding the symmetrical result, and multiplying by
two the single-sided due to the halved energy between sides. The win­
dowing process removes energy from the signal, proportional to the sum
of the window-function coefficients used, and the amplitude correction
factor of the window function is applied in the post-processing (Brandt,
2011) to compensate for that and finally generate the frequency
spectrum.
3.4. Full Spectrum method
The accelerometer signals are processed to generate the Full Spec­
trum according to the diagram shown in Fig. 5. The pre-processing used
is the same used in the individual Frequency Spectrum procedure
described in section 3.3.
After the pre-processing of each vibration signal, it is necessary to
generate a complex sampled signal from the sampled signals through the
equation
c(n) = x(n) + iy(n),
where the sampled signals are defined by x(n) = x(nΔt) and y(n) =
y(nΔt), n is the index of each sample and Δt time interval between
samples.
The Discrete Four Transform (DFT) is applied to the complex signal
as the individual signals, through the equation
Fig. 7. The procedure used to obtain the Full Spectrum and extract the order vibration amplitudes.
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214
( )
∑
N− 1
C(k) =
1 − i2π kn
c(n)e N , with 0 ≤ k ≤ N − 1. (11)
N n=0
The DFT applied to a complex signal is also efficiently carried out by
a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithm (Oppenheim, 1999).
Finally, different from the individual frequency spectrum described
in section 3.3, the post-processing after the DFT does not include dis­
carding half of the spectrum because the result is asymmetric. Therefore,
the Full Spectrum procedure ends by applying the amplitude correction
factor of the window function used in the pre-processing (Brandt, 2011).
Fig. 6 shows the individual frequency spectra of the artificial signals
shown in Fig. 1 and the Full Spectrum for comparisons. Both frequency
spectra exhibit a sinusoid component at 60 Hz. The amplitude of the X
sensor signal is 0.9, as shown in Fig. 6a, and the amplitude of the Y
sensor signal is 1.11, as shown in Fig. 6b. These individual amplitudes
are typically used in the vibration amplitude assessment in ESP systems
and other rotating machines, comparing the higher one to a vibration
limit in a standard or a previous vibration amplitude estimation. The
Full Spectrum in Fig. 6c exhibit two sinusoid components, one at − 60 Hz
and another at 60 Hz, an orbit counter-rotational and corotational
components, with amplitudes 0.99 and 0.19. The rotation direction is
counter-rotational or backward, with the counter-rotational component
(-60 Hz) higher than the corotational one. These amplitudes are not
considered real ones, but their sum gives the amplitude of the semi-
(10) major axis, which is 1.18, as shown in Fig. 1.
3.5. Proposed Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum method
The Full Spectrum does not directly exhibit the semi-major axis
amplitude, and the amplitudes cannot be individually compared to vi­
bration standards limits, which is necessary post-processing. In addition,
the Full Spectrum is significantly different from the individual signal
frequency spectrum and can be considered counterintuitive. The
6
G. Reges et al.
Fig. 8. Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum from the artificial signals shown in
Fig. 1, indicating the semi-major axis amplitude of 1.18, the same as in Fig. 1c.
complexity of analyzing the Full Spectrum may have limited the wide­
spread use of semi-major axis amplitude in vibration analysis of rotating
machines. Liang et al. (2013) presented a method to calculate a spec­
trum with the semi-major axis amplitudes through trigonometric oper­
ations over the two individual Frequency Spectrum, but the method
involves more operations than the generation of the Full Spectrum and
its post-processing. Therefore, this paper proposes a method to generate
a spectrum that directly exhibits the semi-major axis amplitude based on
the Full Spectrum.
Considering Eq. (9), the semi-major axis amplitude of the orbit of
each frequency component is equivalent to the sum of its corotational
and counter-rotational components. Thus, the Orbit Semi-major Axis
Spectrum is generated by the equation
⎧
Cw (0), with k = 0,
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ The Frequency Spectrum allows the analysis of the signal frequency
Csm (k) = Cw (N/2), with k = N/2, (12)
⎪
⎪
⎩ Cw (k) + Cw (N − k), with 1 ≤ k ≤ N − 1.
⎪ the sensor signals from Pump #1 top section in the experiments at speed
2 60 Hz and BEP operating condition. The main frequency components in
The accelerometer signals are processed according to the diagram in
Fig. 7 to generate the Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum. The procedure is
the same as the Full Spectrum with the added last step of the Orbit Semi-
major Axis Spectrum generation as Eq. (12).
Fig. 8 shows the Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum from the artificial
signals shown in Fig. 1a and b, with the indication of the semi-major axis
Fig. 9. Signals from the X and Y sensors at pumps top, after pre-processing, from the experiment with Pump #1 operating at 60 Hz in the BEP condition. a) velocity
from X sensor signal in the time domain. b) velocity from Y sensor signal in the time domain. c) orbit from the combination between X and Y sensors signals.
7
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214
amplitude of 1.18, which is the same as shown Fig. 1c, and higher than
the individual axis amplitudes and higher than the Full Spectrum am­
plitudes in Fig. 6.
4. Results and discussion
The signals from the experiments with the two pumps were pre-
processed as described in the methodology section, removing Direct
Current (DC), converting from voltage to accelerations units, converting
from acceleration to velocity units through integration, and then
filtering low-frequency residue from the integration process. Fig. 9
shows signals from the accelerometers X and Y at pumps top in time
domain and orbit, after pre-processing, from the experiment with the
Pump #1 operating at 60 Hz in the best efficiency point (BEP) operating
condition. The signals are composed of many frequency components,
which are difficult to analyze in the time domain, as shown in Fig. 9a
and b, but it is possible to observe a phase difference primarily due to the
orthogonal relationship between the sensors and orbital movement. The
combination of the X and Y sensor signals generates the orbit observed in
Fig. 9c. The orbit shows an elliptic shape, with the major axis oriented in
a diagonal between the horizontal and vertical axis, so the maximum
radial amplitude is not found in the horizontal or vertical axes but within
an angle between the two axes. The orbit combines information from X
and Y sensor signals in the time domain, and then the visual interpre­
tation is also difficult regards the presence of many frequency compo­
nents, including low frequencies signal components that cause the orbit
to drift from the ellipsis center.
4.1. Observations about the orbits’ shape
Fig. 10a and Fig. 10b show the orbits from the three accelerometer
pairs located at the top, middle, and base sections of pumps 1 and 2. The
overall orbits have different shapes and amplitudes, with more complex
shapes in Pump #2. In addition, the major axis angles are also different
between the orbits of different sections and pumps.
components, and Fig. 11a and Fig. 11b show the Frequency Spectra of
each spectrum are the same, but they have different amplitudes, indi­
cating that the sensors detect different stimuli depending on the sensor’s
orientation. The orders identified in Figs. 11a and b are examples of
synchronous operating frequency orders analyzed in the ESP recom­
mend practice. Order 1 and order 0.5 exhibit higher amplitudes in the X
sensor than the Y sensor. The amplitude and phase differences (not
exhibited) between both spectra define the full orbit shape. The higher
G. Reges et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214

Fig. 10. Orbits of all the pump sections from the experiments with Pump #1 and Pump #2 operating at 60 Hz speed in the BEP condition.

Fig. 11. Frequency Spectra of the sensor signals from the top of the Pump #1 in the experiments at 60 Hz and BEP operating condition: a) spectrum of the X sensor
signal b) spectrum of the Y sensor signal.

amplitude between both sensors is typically used in vibration analysis to
determine if the vibration is above some limit or above the previous
amplitude.
Just as the time signals are composed of frequency components, the
orbits are also composed of orbit components with individual maximum
amplitudes, shapes, and orientations. To visualize the orbit components,
frequency, amplitude, and phase characteristics were extracted from the
individual signals’ spectra. These extracted characteristics were used to
generate signals with one sinusoidal component only, which is equiva­
lent to filtering the original signals to pass only the analyzed frequency.
Fig. 12 shows the orbit components of the orders typically inspected in
the ESP pump acceptance analysis, from the top sensor signals at pump
#1 in the experiments operating at 60 Hz in BEP condition. The orbit
components have different shapes, ellipticities, and major axis angles.
For instance, orbit order 0.33 is the orbit component with the frequency
of 0.33 times the synchronous frequency, and it exhibits in pump #1
(Fig. 12) an elliptical shape with the semi-major axis angle different
from X and Y axes, so the semi-major axis amplitude is higher than
observed in X and Y axes. Another instance is the orbit order 0.42–0.48,
representing the orbit of the frequency component with higher ampli­
tude in the range of 0.42 and 0.48 times synchronous frequency. This
orbit component exhibits a more circular shape than the others, so the
difference between the amplitude of the X and Y axes and the major axis
is lower in this orbit component. Finally, the orbit order 5–10 represents
the orbit of the frequency component with higher amplitude in the range
of 5 and 10 times synchronous frequency. This orbit component exhibits
a more elongated elliptical shape than the others, with the major axis
angle between the X and Y axes, so the difference between the semi-

8
G. Reges et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214

Fig. 12. Order orbit components of the orders typically inspected in the ESP pump acceptance analysis, from the top sensor signals at pump #1 in experiments
operating at 60 Hz in BEP condition.

Fig. 13. Order orbit components of the orders typically inspected in the ESP pump acceptance analysis, from the top sensor signals at pump #2 in experiments
operating at 60 Hz in BEP condition.

major axis amplitude and the X and Y amplitude is higher than other
orbits in pump #1.
Fig. 13 shows orbit components from the top sensor signals at pump
#2 in the experiments operating at 60 Hz in BEP condition. The orbit
components have different shapes, ellipticities, and major axis angles
between the same pump and between pump #2 and pump #1 (Fig. 12).
For instance, orbit order 0.33 exhibits in pump #2 a more elongated
elliptical shape than pump #1, so the difference between the semi-major
axis amplitude and the X and Y amplitude is higher in pump #2. Another
instance is the orbit order 0.42–0.48 that exhibits a very different shape
in pump #2 than pump #1, practically a straight line, with the major
axis angle between the X and Y axes, closer to the X axis. Finally, the
orbit order 5–10 exhibits in pump #2 a similar shape to pump #1 but
with the major axis angle closer to the X axis, so the difference between
the semi-major axis amplitude and the X and Y amplitude is lower in
pump #2 than in pump #1.
The orbits ellipticities and major axis angles may be used as features
for diagnosis systems, but the differences between the semi-major axis
amplitude and the X and Y axes are of primary interest for the vibration
amplitude assessment. Figs. 12 and 13 show that these differences are
more significant depending on the pump and the synchronous frequency
order.
4.2. Full Spectrum versus orbit semi-major Axis Spectrum
The typical Frequency Spectrum uses only one sensor signal and does

9
G. Reges et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214

Fig. 14. Spectra from the sensors signals at the top of the pump #1 in the experiments at speed 60 Hz and BEP operating condition. a) Full Spectrum with amplitudes
at forward and backward orders of the synchronous frequency b) Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum with amplitudes identified at orders of the synchronous frequency.

Fig. 15. Cascade plots of spectra from the sensors signals at all pump #1’s sections in the experiments operating at 60 Hz speed and BEP condition. a) Full Spectra
with amplitudes at forward and backward orders of the synchronous frequency. b) Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectra with amplitudes at orders of the synchro­
nous frequency.

not have information about the orbit, and then it is impossible to analyze
orbit characteristics as the semi-major axis amplitude. The Full Spec­
trum uses both sensor signals and decomposes the orbit in frequency
components called corotational and counter-rotational components, or
backward and forward rotational components. Fig. 14a shows the Full
Spectrum of the pump top sensor pair signals, operating at 60 Hz in BEP
condition. The amplitudes of order 1 and order 0.5 forward and back­
ward rotation components are indicated, with the backward compo­
nents higher than the forward components. Relations and combinations
between the amplitudes of the backward and forwards components
indicate information of the orbit components, as the orbit components
direction of rotation, semi-major and semi-minor axes amplitudes. The
semi-major axis is not directly exhibited in the Full Spectrum, and the
amplitudes cannot be individually compared to standard vibration
limits, being necessary post-processing. The proposed Orbit Semi-major
Axis Spectrum overcomes these limitations, allowing direct access to the
semi-major axis amplitude that is the maximum radial amplitude.
Fig. 14b shows the Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum generated from the
Full Spectrum in Fig. 14a, and the order 1 and order 0.5 amplitudes are
indicated. These are the maximum vibration amplitudes and are higher
than the amplitudes shown in Fig. 11 Frequency Spectrum. The Orbit
Semi-major Axis Spectrum is similar to the traditional Frequency Spec­
trum, allowing a similar analysis process.
Cascade plots exhibit frequency spectra sequentially and are used to
compare the spectrum from different sections or different operating
conditions. For instance, Fig. 15 shows cascade plots with Full Spectra
and Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectra from the sensors signals at all pump
#1 sections in the experiments operating at 60 Hz speed and BEP con­
dition. Full Spectrum plots have more information than individual fre­
quency spectrum, then cascade plots of Full Spectrum are more complex
to analyze, as shown in Fig. 15a. However, cascade plots of Orbit Semi-
major Axis Spectrum (Fig. 15b) can be analyzed as an individual fre­
quency spectrum, allowing to compare maximum section amplitudes
directly, which are higher in the last section on orders 0.5 and 1. In the
cascade plot with Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectra (Fig. 15b), it is possible
to observe that the vibration in the middle section is the lowest. The
lower vibration amplitude in the middle section can be due to, for
example, vibration modes or located faults on the pump extremes.
However, this analysis is not the focus of this work, which focuses on
higher accuracy on estimating maximum amplitudes to allow higher
accuracy in the ESP acceptance analysis and further diagnosis accuracy.

10
G. Reges et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214

Table 1
Amplitudes (mm/s) of synchronous operating frequency orders, from sensors signals at pump #1 sections, in experiments operating at 60 Hz in the BEP operating
condition. Amplitudes were extracted from individual Frequency Spectra of sensor signals X and Y and Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum. The minimum difference is the
difference between the orbit semi-major axis and maximum amplitude between X and Y sensors.
Section Synchronous Frequency Order Frequency X sensor Y sensor Orbit semi-major axis Minimum difference

Top 0.33 18.7 0.141 0.088 0.143 1.3%

[0.42, 0.48] 26.7 0.375 0.364 0.377 0.4%
0.5 28.4 0.733 0.709 0.854 14.2%
1 56.7 7.648 5.867 8.080 5.3%
2 113.5 0.245 0.276 0.371 25.5%
3 170.2 0.082 0.049 0.088 6.6%
[5–10] 361.5 0.113 0.118 0.162 27.1%
Middle 0.33 18.7 0.047 0.038 0.060 21.0%
[0.42, 0.48] 26.7 0.257 0.100 0.261 1.3%
0.5 28.4 0.439 0.427 0.541 18.8%
1 56.7 4.113 3.633 4.519 9.0%
2 113.5 0.349 0.171 0.385 9.4%
3 170.2 0.067 0.064 0.093 28.0%
[5–10] 361.5 0.110 0.165 0.198 16.5%
Base 0.33 18.7 0.108 0.045 0.108 0.1%
[0.42, 0.48] 26.7 0.444 0.437 0.483 8.1%
0.5 28.4 0.585 0.903 0.903 0.0%
1 56.7 4.842 3.866 4.855 0.3%
2 113.5 1.068 0.819 1.150 7.1%
3 170.2 0.132 0.086 0.157 15.5%
[5–10] 361.5 0.141 0.072 0.158 10.8%

Table 2
Amplitudes (mm/s) of synchronous operating frequency orders, from sensors signals at pump #2 sections, in experiments operating at 60 Hz in the BEP operating
condition. Amplitudes were extracted from individual Frequency Spectra of sensor signals X and Y and Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum. The minimum difference is the
difference between the orbit semi-major axis and maximum amplitude between X and Y sensors.
Section Synchronous Frequency Order Frequency X Sensor Y Sensor Orbit Semi-major axis Minimum Difference

Top 0.33 18.5 0.048 0.049 0.067 26.7%

[0.42, 0.48] 24.6 0.099 0.077 0.125 21.0%
0.5 28.2 1.803 1.064 1.838 1.9%
1 56.4 1.967 1.323 1.996 1.4%
2 112.9 1.295 0.894 1.400 7.5%
3 169.3 0.183 0.153 0.202 9.5%
[5–10] 361.5 0.111 0.072 0.131 15.2%
Middle 0.33 18.5 0.045 0.033 0.056 18.7%
[0.42, 0.48] 24.6 0.096 0.077 0.122 21.4%
0.5 28.2 0.675 0.378 0.676 0.1%
1 56.4 2.569 1.510 2.569 0.0%
2 112.9 1.011 0.724 1.097 7.8%
3 169.3 0.190 0.182 0.225 15.2%
[5–10] 361.5 0.272 0.162 0.315 13.7%
Base 0.33 18.5 0.085 0.062 0.105 19.1%
[0.42, 0.48] 24.6 0.118 0.060 0.132 10.3%
0.5 28.2 1.650 0.881 1.653 0.2%
1 56.4 2.350 1.949 2.363 0.6%
2 112.9 0.855 0.704 0.990 13.7%
3 169.3 0.283 0.237 0.294 3.7%
[5–10] 361.5 0.040 0.074 0.077 4.2%

4.3. Estimated vibration amplitudes comparison
Table 1 and Table 2 show vibration amplitude estimations between
individual sensors and the orbit semi-major axis amplitudes of orders of
the synchronous operating frequency were extracted from all pump #1
and pump #2 sections in experiments operating at 60 Hz. Amplitudes
were extracted from individual frequency spectra of sensor signals X and
Y and the Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum. The minimum difference in
the tables is the difference between the orbit semi-major axis amplitude
and maximum amplitude between X and Y sensors.
Table 2 shows the higher difference at the top section in order 5–10,
with 27.1%. This order’s orbit exhibits an elongated elliptical shape with
an angle right between X and Y axes, as shown in Fig. 12. Pump #1’s
higher differences occur in higher orders, especially order 3 and order
5–10. The higher difference in pump #1 overall is 28%, occurring in
order 3 at the middle section.
In Table 2, the higher difference at the top section occurs in order
0.33, with 26,7%, and this is the higher difference in pump #2 overall.
This order’s orbit exhibits an elongated elliptical shape with an angle
right between X and Y axes, as shown in Fig. 13. The higher pump #1’s
differences occur in lower orders, especially order 0.33 and order
0.42–0.48.
In the results shown in Tables 1 and 2, the higher difference reaches
28% (pump #1, middle section, order 3), and this indicates that a pump
with vibration 28% above the accepted limit could be accepted as being
in the limit. Thus, a vibration amplitudes diagnosis process may have
greater accuracy using the Otablerbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum than
the individual frequency spectrum.
5. Conclusion
This paper presents a method for estimating the vibration amplitude

11
G. Reges et al.
of Electrical Submersible Pumps, invariant to the shape of the orbital
components. Usually, the vibration amplitude assessment uses the
maximum vibration amplitude between two orthogonal sensor signals,
but there is no guarantee that one of the individual sensors is aligned to
the maximum radial amplitude of the elliptical orbit components. This
misalignment leads to an error between the estimated amplitude in the
sensors and the maximum radial amplitude. In extreme conditions, the
maximum radial amplitude can be up to 41,4% higher than using indi­
vidual sensors amplitude which is the traditional method. The proposed
method estimates each orbital frequency component’s maximum radial
vibration amplitude independent of the orbit’s shape.
The proposed method was compared to the typical vibration
amplitude estimation approach using individual sensor signals and the
Full Spectrum method, being applied on vibration signals from two
different Electrical Submersible Pumps, and results were analyzed.
The results indicate that the proposed method presented the
maximum radial vibration amplitudes of each orbit frequency compo­
nent (orbit semi-major axis), which is not directly possible with the Full
Spectrum and is impossible with the individual frequency spectrum.
Furthermore, the Orbit Semi-major Axis Spectrum use in cascade plots
allowed the direct comparison of the maximum radial amplitude be­
tween different pump sections. The results showed that the maximum
radial amplitudes of the ESP pumps tested were up to 28% higher than
the maximum amplitude detected in the individual orthogonal sensors.
The demonstrated amplitude differences indicate that some equipment
may be approved with a vibration amplitude above the acceptance limit
if the analysis neglects the orbit semi-major axis amplitudes. Therefore,
the proposed method may be a better option for the vibration amplitude
analysis of the Electrical Submersible Pump (ESP) systems.
In the future, the orbits can be investigated in several axial positions
to evaluate the importance of more sensors to the ESP vibration accep­
tance analysis. Another research line that can be pursued is investigating
vibration modes’ influence on the orbit component shapes.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Galdir Reges: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data
Curation, Investigation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing - orig­
inal draft, Writing - review & editing. Marcio Fontana: Conceptuali­
zation, Supervision, Methodology, Writing - review & editing. Erbet
Costa: Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Antonio
Lima: Formal analysis, Validation, Visualization, Writing - review &
editing. Marcos Ribeiro: Project administration, Resources, Validation,
Writing - review & editing, Funding acquisition. Leizer Schnitman:
Project administration, Resources, Validation, Writing - review & edit­
ing, Funding acquisition.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the Research and Development Center
(CENPES) by PETROBRAS for their financial support (Grant
0050.0094188.14.9) and the Brazilian agencies CNPQ (Conselho
Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico), CAPES (Coor­
denação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior), and FAPESB
(Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia) for their support.
References
Adams, M.L., 2010. Rotating Machinery Vibration from Analysis to Troubleshooting.
CRC Press.
12
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214
API, 2012. Recommended Practice on Electric Submersible System Vibrations API RP
11S8. American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., EUA.
Barrios Castellanos, M., Serpa, A.L., Biazussi, J.L., Monte Verde, W., do Socorro Dias
Arrifano Sassim, N., 2020. Fault identification using a chain of decision trees in an
electrical submersible pump operating in a liquid-gas flow. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 184,
106490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.106490.
Boldt, F.D.A., Rauber, T.W., Varejao, M.F., Ribeiro, M.P., 2014. Performance analysis of
extreme learning machine for automatic diagnosis of electrical submersible pump
conditions. In: 2014 12th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics
(INDIN).
Brandt, A., 2011. Noise and vibration analysis: signal analysis and experimental
procedures. In: Noise and Vibration Analysis: Signal Analysis and Experimental
Procedures, first ed. Wiley, West Sussex. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470978160.
Castillo, M.A., Gutiérrez, R.H.R., Monteiro, U.A., Minette, R.S., Vaz, L.A., 2019. Modal
parameters estimation of an electrical submersible pump installed in a test well using
numerical and experimental analysis. Ocean. Eng. 176, 1–7. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.02.035.
Da Costa, Cesar, Da Gama, Ronaldo S., Nascimento, Carlos E., Brandão, Iago M., De
Medeiros, Everton C., Mathias, Mauro H., 2018. Orbit analysis for imbalance fault
detection in rotating machinery. IOSR J. Electr. Electron. Eng. 13, 43–53. https://
doi.org/10.9790/1676-1301044353.
Chen, L., Han, J., Lei, W., Cui, Y., Guan, Z., 2016a. Full-vector signal acquisition and
information fusion for the fault prediction. Int. J. Rotating Mach. https://doi.org/
10.1155/2016/5980802, 2016.
Chen, L., Han, J., Lei, W., Guan, Z.H., Gao, Y., 2017. Prediction model of vibration
feature for equipment maintenance based on full vector spectrum. Shock Vib. 17–19
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/6103947, 2017.
Chen, P., Wang, K., Feng, K., 2016b. Application of order-tracking holospectrum to
cracked rotor fault diagnostics under nonstationary conditions. Progn. Syst. Heal.
Manag. Conf. 2016, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/PHM.2016.7819887.
Ciabattoni, L., Ferracuti, F., Freddi, A., Monteriu, A., 2017. Statistical spectral analysis
for fault diagnosis of rotating machines. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 65, 4301–4310.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2017.2762623.
Costa, E.A., de Abreu, O.S.L., Silva, T.D.O., Ribeiro, M.P., Schnitman, L., 2021.
A Bayesian approach to the dynamic modeling of ESP-lifted oil well systems: an
experimental validation on an ESP prototype. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 205, 108880.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2021.108880.
Elbhbah, K., Sinha, J.K., 2013. Vibration-based condition monitoring of rotating
machines using a machine composite spectrum. J. Sound Vib. 332, 2831–2845.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2012.12.024.
Garcia-Perez, A., Romero-Troncoso, R.D.J., Cabal-Yepez, E., Osornio-Rios, R.A., 2011.
The application of high-resolution spectral analysis for identifying multiple
combined faults in induction motors. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 58 https://doi.org/
10.1109/TIE.2010.2051398, 2002–2010.
Jung, J.H., Jeon, B.C., Youn, B.D., Kim, M., Kim, D., Kim, Y., 2017. Omnidirectional
regeneration (ODR) of proximity sensor signals for robust diagnosis of journal
bearing systems. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 90, 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ymssp.2016.12.030.
Lang, G., Liao, Y., Liu, Q., Lin, J., 2015. Study on the precession orbit shape analysis-
based linear fault qualitative identification method for rotating machinery. J. Sound
Vib. 335, 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2014.09.018.
Lee, C.-W., 1993. Vibration Analysis of Rotors. Springer, Netherlands.
Lees, A.W., 2016. Vibration Problems in Machines, Vibration Problems in Machines. CRC
Press, Boca Raton. https://doi.org/10.1201/b19069.
Liang, Y., Liu, T., Liu, H., Si, J., Huang, X., Wang, R., 2013. Synthetic Amplitude
Spectrum and its extensions for analyzing the two perpendicular directional
vibration displacement signals of a rotating rotor. Adv. Mech. Eng. https://doi.org/
10.1155/2013/218576, 2013.
Liu, S., Qu, L., 2008. A new field balancing method of rotor systems based on
holospectrum and genetic algorithm. Appl. Soft Comput. J. 8, 446–455. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.asoc.2006.11.012.
Minette, R.S., SilvaNeto, S.F., Vaz, L.A., Monteiro, U.A., 2016. Experimental modal
analysis of electrical submersible pumps. Ocean. Eng. 124, 168–179. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.07.054.
Mohanty, a R., Pradhan, P.K., Mahalik, N.P., Dastidar, S.G., 2012. Fault detection in a
centrifugal pump using vibration and motor current signature analysis. Int. J.
Autom. Control 6, 261–276.
Oppenheim, A.V., 1999. Discrete-time signal processing. In: Electronics and Power.
https://doi.org/10.1049/ep.1977.0078.
Patel, T.H., Darpe, A.K., 2009. Experimental investigations on vibration response of
misaligned rotors. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 23, 2236–2252. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ymssp.2009.04.004.
Qu, L., Liao, Y., Lin, J., Zhao, M., 2018. Investigation on the subsynchronous pseudo-
vibration of rotating machinery. J. Sound Vib. 423, 340–354. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jsv.2018.02.056.
Qu, L., Liu, X., Peyronne, G., Chen, Y., 1989. The holospectrum: a new method for rotor
surveillance and diagnosis. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 3, 255–267. https://doi.org/
10.1016/0888-3270(89)90052-6.
Randall, R.B., 2010. Vibration-Based Condition Monitoring: Industrial, Aerospace and
Automotive Applications, Vibration-Based Condition Monitoring: Industrial,
Aerospace and Automotive Applications. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470977668.
Reges, G., Fontana, M., Ribeiro, M., Silva, T., Abreu, O., Reis, R., Schnitman, L., 2021.
Electric submersible pump vibration analysis under several operational conditions
for vibration fault differential diagnosis. Ocean. Eng. 219, 108249. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108249.
G. Reges et al.
Ribeiro, M.P., Oliveira, P. da S., Matos, J.S. de, Silva, J.E.M., 2005. Field applications of
subsea electrical submersible pumps in Brazil. Proc. Offshore Technol. Conf. https://
doi.org/10.4043/17415-ms.
Scheffer, C., Girdhar, P., 2004. Practical Machinery Vibration Analysis and Predictive
Maintenance, Machinery Vibration Analysis & Predictive Maintenance. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0301-679X(78)90097-X.
Southwick, D., 1993. Using Full Spectrum Plots. Orbit.
Takacs, G., 2017. Electrical Submersible Pumps Manual: Design, Operations, and
Maintenance, second ed. Gulf Professional Publishing.
Tsypkin, M., 2013. Induction motor condition monitoring: vibration analysis technique-
A twice line frequency component as a diagnostic tool. In: 2013 IEEE International
13
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 211 (2022) 110214
Electric Machines and Drives Conference. IEMDC, pp. 117–124. https://doi.org/
10.1109/IEMDC.2013.6556242, 2013.
Wang, J., Hu, H., 2006. Vibration-based fault diagnosis of pump using fuzzy technique.
Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed. 39, 176–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
measurement.2005.07.015.
Yang, Y., Zhou, L., Han, Y., Hang, J., Lv, W., Shi, W., He, Z., Pan, B., 2021a. Pressure
pulsation investigation in an electrical submersible pump based on Morlet
continuous wavelet transform. J. Mech. Eng. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1177/
09544062211000077.
Yang, Y., Zhou, L., Shi, W., He, Z., Han, Y., Xiao, Y., 2021b. Interstage difference of
pressure pulsation in a three-stage electrical submersible pump. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng.
196, 107653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2020.107653.